Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
Question No. 2—Prime Minister
2. CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all of his Government’s statements and actions?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Prime Minister): Yes.
Christopher Luxon: How does he reconcile his claim he sent memos to the Public Service about constant spending “many times over the last five years” with Public Service Commissioner Peter Hughes’ statement today that he’s never received one?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In fact, the memo in question—or the memo in question if that’s the best example of the memo in question—was in fact a minute from Cabinet. That is about the highest form of memo that you can get within the New Zealand Public Service, which is—
Hon Grant Robertson: He hasn’t been in Cabinet.
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yeah, and I’m surprised the member opposite isn’t aware of that. I’d also note that I have met, as the Minister for the Public Service, on a regular basis, normally several times a year, with all of the chief executives of the Public Service Government departments from which this has been a topic of conversation. They should be well aware of the Government’s expectations.
Christopher Luxon: So why is Peter Hughes contradicting him?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: He isn’t.
Christopher Luxon: What did he actually do to follow up on his promise in 2018 to cut spending on consultants, or was it just a press release that he fired out and odd directives and memos?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: As I’ve just indicated to the member, there was a Cabinet minute that made clear the Government’s expectations to all Government agencies.
Christopher Luxon: So why hasn’t there been a reduction in consultant spending?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Ultimately, Government department chief executives make the decision on how best to deliver on the Government’s priorities. We’ve been very clear that we want to see less spending on consultants and contractors.
Christopher Luxon: Does he stand by his claim that the $16 million spent on the cancelled TVNZ-RNZ merger was “not necessarily wasted”?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: There’s no question that some of the findings from that will point to the future direction of Government policy around public broadcasting. That landscape is changing significantly, and anybody who wants to bury their head in the sand and pretend otherwise is clearly going to end up with a public media sector that’s moribund.
Christopher Luxon: Is it a waste of money to pay the TVNZ-RNZ merger board $8,000 a day to keep working on a project that he’s cancelled?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: We were very clear, and I was very clear when I announced that that work would not be proceeding, that there would be some wind-down costs. I’d expect that the departments and agencies can soon get through those as quickly and as efficiently as possible.
Christopher Luxon: Does he agree with Willie Jackson, who said the merger could be back post cyclone recovery?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: We’ve made it very clear what the Government’s priorities are here. Radio New Zealand and TVNZ will continue as independent entities.
CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Which is worse: his track record as Public Service Minister, where he failed to rein in consultant spending, his track record as education Minister, where he failed to lift achievement, his track record as police Minister, where he failed to bring down crime, or his track record so far as Prime Minister, where he’s failed to do anything?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I reject all of the above, but particularly on crime I’d note that during the time I was the Minister of Police the number of ram-raids that were being conducted fell by three-quarters. So a 75 percent reduction in that through some intensive intervention on the part of the Government. The member so far doesn’t seem to be able to get past bumper sticker slogans and come up with any concrete actual ideas about how to make New Zealand a better place to live.
David Seymour: Can the Prime Minister explain mathematically what impact 82 new truancy officers will make on just under 100,000 chronically absent students?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The attendance officers are going to be working directly with schools to support their efforts to get those kids who are currently not engaging in education regularly back into the classroom on a more regular basis. As we know from previous experience, that can take a number of different forms. In some cases simply more active engagement with the families can get those kids attending more regularly. In other cases it requires more intensive intervention, which is why this is only one piece of that puzzle. We’ve also put additional funding into the attendance services who do that more intensive work with the kids who are not enrolled, or who are not regularly engaged, and who are at that chronic end of non-attendance.
David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was very specific and turned on the word “mathematically”. Now, he’s made lots of general statements, but he hasn’t addressed the fact that he’s got 82 people trying to chase about 100,000 kids.
SPEAKER: I completely disagree. A further supplementary?
David Seymour: How do you disagree?
SPEAKER: Are you challenging my ruling?
David Seymour: No, asking about it.
SPEAKER: No, well, don’t do that.
