edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Simmonds PennyPENNY SIMMONDS (National—Invercargill): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'm pleased to stand and speak in support of the Employment Relations (Extended Time for Personal Grievance for Sexual Harassment) Amendment Bill in this its third reading. Like others I recognise the Hon Dr Deborah Russell who first brought this member's bill and then Marja Lubeck who took it further.The bill has quite a straightforward purpose and that is extending the time for an employee to raise a personal grievance alleging sexual harassment from the normal 90-day period of a personal grievance to one year. It does this through several amendments to the Employment Relations Act 2000. The bill was examined by the Education and Workforce Committee—which I am a member of—with very minor changes to the retrospectivity of the bill.We all acknowledge that sexual harassment is completely unacceptable in any context at all—and particularly in the workplace where there is an imbalance of power. Particularly a number of people have acknowledged how when people's livelihoods are dependent on the incomes that they are earning—and particularly in the environment that we're looking at at the moment with the cost of living crisis—it's a very stressful time for people safeguarding their livelihoods.But we believe that it's incredibly important that this legislation gives victims of sexual harassment the time and the safety to be able to speak up. Often for victims of sexual harassment it isn't safe for them when they have fears about their job and fears of where things might end up. They often don't feel safe until they perhaps have a new manager or have gained a new position elsewhere out of that particular work environment. So it can take time for a victim to feel that they are able to take that step of raising a personal grievance.I know a lot of talk has been made about the most vulnerable workers and that's absolutely appropriate but I was also reminded that Dr Deborah Russell when she first introduced this spoke about how prevalent sexual harassment was amongst the legal fraternity. So I think we should acknowledge this is something that can occur very widely across a range of professions and a range of workplaces.So giving victims of sexual harassment in the workplace the time to be able to be in a safe situation themselves to be able to bring forward a personal grievance in this way is incredibly important. We see this bill giving that extension of time improving that personal grievance process for victims of workplace sexual harassment by giving them that sufficient time to consider what has happened to them to get themselves in a safe space and to be able to come forward. Indeed we want all victims of sexual harassment to feel that there is that additional support within the personal grievance process for them. So with that I commend the bill to the House.
Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you Mr Speaker. National does indeed continue to support the bill the Employment Relations (Extended Time for Personal Grievance for Sexual Harassment) Amendment Bill. I assure Mr Omer that our starting point which had been that it is important to consider the particular situation of people who are alleging sexual harassment is properly considered by this House and that a case has been made for the law change that has been brought forward—first by the Hon Deborah Russell as she now is—Hon Scott Simpson: Dr.CHRIS PENK: —in the neighbouring electorate. Excuse me. Dr Russell indeed.Hon Scott Simpson: Hon Dr.CHRIS PENK: Well I got the honourable thank you Mr Scott Simpson—Hon Scott Simpson.Anyway it was brought forward by my neighbouring MP and now it's in the name of Marja Lubeck who's a list MP based in the same electorate as me. I acknowledge them as well as of course importantly the courage of those who have come forward to seek this law change and anyone who in a workplace or elsewhere has suffered at the hands of another person sexual harassment or similar unacceptable behaviour. It goes without saying that such behaviour is unacceptable and in addition to passing this specific law the House condemns such behaviour in no uncertain terms. So as we have heard from Mr Ibrahim Omer the bill extends the time in which a person has the opportunity to bring forward a personal grievance in relation to sexual harassment. There is a balance as always between finality and opportunity. We want to maximise the opportunity for people to have access to the law but there's also a value in the law that says at some point it should be certain how a matter rests. So what we're doing is drawing the line in a different place and saying that it should be as much as a year rather than just that 90-day period within which someone can come forward. So why should sexual harassment be treated any differently?" I suppose is a reasonable question. The answer—we've heard it actually outlined tonight—is that the evidence indicates particularly in relation to matters where sexual harassment has taken place that a person for whatever reason—and it might be shame strange as that might seem to someone outside that context that might be felt by the person who has suffered as the victim or it might be other circumstances of vulnerability in addition to the fact of them having suffered that action—for example precarious or insecure work conditions immigrant status or other particular situations of vulnerability. So National continues to say that we believe this is a well-conceived law. We think that it's had good discussion in previous stages and indeed at select committee. We thank those who have been involved in that process and we commend the bill to the House."
Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill — Instruction to Governance and Administration Committee
Penk Chris; O'Connor GregInstruction to Governance and Administration CommitteeCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): I move That the Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill be reported to the House by 19 July 2023 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 193 195 and 196. Here I conclude my referral motion.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Does the member wish to speak to the motion? CHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you Mr Speaker—only briefly to say that the reason that I have suggested the report-back date that I have voiced and have I think tentative agreement for from the other side of the House is simply for two reasons. It's a relatively short period of time. One is that because the law only explicitly refers and relates to one particular person I don't think it will take longer than the roughly two months that I've suggested in order to do that and the other reason is that by having a report-back date of mid-July there's a fighting chance that we'll be able to pass this law before the end of this Parliament which will be if nothing else a cause for some satisfaction I think and as much certainty as possible in this situation. Annie's parents are alive now—her birth parents are alive now—and it would be wonderful if before too much longer they were to have the opportunity to see this passed into law for their own sake as well as that of their daughter Annie. Motion agreed to.
Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill — First Reading
SpeechANAHILA KANONGATA'A (Labour): Noa'ia e te Mana Whakawā. It's an absolute privilege to stand here tonight to speak on the Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill. I'd like to acknowledge the member whose brought this bill to the House Chris Penk. Thank you Chris Penk for bringing this to the House.This Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill is really important. I can never understand and can never know what it's like to be Susan Mary Cox; to have a child with the birth father Scott Geoffrey Sinel 50 years ago and 10 months later be registered another name and not know the name of their child and where their child is. I would never know that.I'd want to say today that regardless of what we say here today it is a celebration Annie Oxborough has got her day in law today. It's a first step to making it real.I want to acknowledge that in December 1971 the birth certificate of Annie Oxborough was Angela Joy Marshall. In law it says that this birth certificate is the legal source of identity for Annie Oxborough" at the time 50 years ago.I want to acknowledge the leadership of Annie and her determination and her determination to share her experience. I haven't read her book Where the [F*ck] is My Mother? but I want to commend her leadership for that. All Annie seeks to have is to have her account to have her lineage recorded in her identity.On that note I don't want to hold us any further. I want to commend the bill to the House. Mālō."
SpeechANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. Before I commence I'd just like to say it's nice to see you in the Chair. I am delighted to be speaking on the Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill. It's a matter I think that we all in the House are concerned about. I want to acknowledge the member Chris Penk for the work that he's done and the sensitive brief that he has given us of the life of Annie and her desires to see this bill come to pass.I think this is a great example of when the House comes together on a matter that we consider important. We're not yelling at each other. We're not being nasty to each other. We're all getting on doing something that is significant and important and while that may be to just one person it is extremely significant to her life and her life's history. I can only begin to imagine the yearning and the desire that she has to know her whakapapa and to find it and now to have her parents recorded on that birth certificate. So I think that's simply an important thing to do.But however I do agree with other members—gosh it's cumbersome to have to come before the House and use the House in this manner to change a birth certificate. We surely can do better. However this will fix the matter for Annie Oxborough.Now I just wanted to make mention of—so I'm a member of the Social Services and Community Committee. Now in the 52nd select committee we had a number of women come before us to talk to us about the forced adoption process. Frankly it was heartbreaking. The stories that those women told us and the children who came before us as well who were affected—it was devastating to hear those stories. I want to acknowledge their courage as well. So Mrs Maggie Wilkinson Mrs Hamilton and Ms Sumner who came before us with that petition I want to acknowledge them in this House today. What we were able to do with that piece of work—and I think it's worthwhile mentioning—is that that particular circumstance of forced adoption was then placed into the abuse in care royal commission of inquiry so that those women and children had the opportunity to come before the organisation and to speak their story. We look to see what the outcome will be for them. Nevertheless I think it's important to say that.I'm also particularly interested to read Annie's book; I think it looks like a good read. Like most members here I have my own adoption story from family. I was born in 1971 so it was something pretty common in that era and continued to be so until the 1980s. So as a consequence I think many of us have adoption stories of family members etc. We need to fix this. We're working on it. It's coming along. But I do think that time in this House is being taken for an important matter for Annie and I do hope that we don't need to continue to do this going forward. But with that it is my great pleasure to commend this bill to the House.
SpeechTĀMATI COFFEY (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. Can I acknowledge actually the heaviness with which I'm sure Annie and her family have traversed bringing this bill to the House. Can I thank the member Chris Penk for bringing it to the attention of Parliament. Can I also agree with the member from the ACT Party that this keeps happening. We had the Paige Harris Birth Registration Bill come before the House. We had to send that through to a select committee process and all that needed to happen was that a name needed to be put on to a birth certificate. It seems like a very quick administrative fix but the fact that it needs to take parliamentary time House time in this House seems absolutely ludicrous to me and here we are again having to go through a very extreme process to be able to fix something that needs to be fixed. But does it need to be fixed through this House like this? Can we find a better way to do this? I should think that we should be able to do that.I've got to say just tonight I was having a conversation with somebody who brought up to me the fact that he and his partner this year got married and while that's all good and well the marriage certificate was presented to him and it said groom and bridegroom". He sat there and looked at it and said "But I'm not a bride and there's no bride in our relationship." But the certificate is apparently so fixed that it has bridegroom on it. He took umbrage with that and he said "But I'm not; I'm just a groom so could we just have that on there?" They said no. So there may be another bill that may have to come to the House to try and correct something which again should not take the time of the House to be able to fix these little things.But they are big things because we as New Zealanders we do rely on our identification we do rely on these things like birth certificates marriage certificates death certificates. They are important but I truly believe that we shouldn't be taking time in the House to be able to fix something that seems at the outset such a simple fix. I will pursue that one and I will also look to support this one. I hope that Annie gets her justice and I hope that she gets it soon so that we can continue to focus on the bigger issues that bring us to Wellington and into Parliament as well. So I commend this to the House."
Tuiono TeanauTEANAU TUIONO (Green): I rise on behalf of the Greens to support the Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill. I'd also like to join others around the House in thanking the member Chris Penk for bringing this bill to the House and for outlining the breadth of the bill but also the narrowness of the bill and how it will specifically correct this circumstance of Annie Oxborough but also understanding that it opens up a wider conversation about those who were impacted who continue to feel the impacts of finding out that they've been adopted but that their parents were coerced into adopting them out.This bill will enable Annie Oxborough to register the name of her birth parents on her legal birth certificate in the place of her adopted parents. All relevant people associated with this private bill have given their consent for this action to take place. Ms Oxborough's birth parents with whom she has formed a relationship are fully supportive.I remember when the Paige Harris bill came through the House as well and how people try to do everything with the tools that they have and then they run out of those tools and we find ourselves discussing these types of very very important issues in the House as well. That's what's happened in this case with Annie Oxborough. So I would also like to acknowledge her bravery for stepping forward for telling her story and also her commitment to get it this far as well. I'm sure that it will encourage others to speak out as well. I think it's really important for us to remember and to hold the trauma for many people who this will resonate with as well. As I was thinking about this bill I was reading through one of the witness statements from the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care in particular of people who had gone through the St Mary's Home for Unwed Mothers and the many young mothers who were coerced to give up their children without their permission—the trauma that must still be there for those mothers and the intergenerational trauma continuing on for those children who are trying to find their story because life is about if you're going to stand on your tūrangawaewae if you're going to stand on your whenua—and I look at it from that perspective as a Māori—it is about knowing that whakapapa it is about knowing the connection how you are connected back as well. If that story is missing for you then people go searching as well.So I want to acknowledge the trauma for some of our parents for some of the people who are searching out there as well but I also acknowledge the bravery and that journey towards healing in terms of the trauma that was impacted upon particularly on the children and the descendants of the parents.I look forward to hearing more about this bill and like with others around the House we acknowledge Annie Oxborough once again and also all the members for being very receptive to this type of legislation and we commend it to the House.
Boyack RachelRACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson): Thank you Madam Speaker. It is very much a privilege to take a short call on the Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill. May I begin by acknowledging the member taking this bill through the Parliament Chris Penk and thank him for his work and I also acknowledge Annie. It must be quite strange to be listening in to a group of strangers in the Parliament talking about your life in such a detailed and intimate way and can I acknowledge Annie's strength in speaking out publicly writing a book about her journey and taking this step to right a wrong that occurred in her life. As a member of the Governance and Administration Committee which will consider this bill can I just assure Annie that we will treat this bill with the care and respect that it deserves and we will treat her story well and uphold her mana throughout this process. Having been on the committee that took through the Paige Harris bill last year it was a humbling experience for us all and there are times in this Parliament when we take through bills like this that are deeply personal for individual New Zealanders. Can I just acknowledge the comments from the previous speaker James McDowell from the ACT Party who has made I think absolutely accurate comments and wise comments about the need for broader law reform. I don't think anyone in this House would hold a view these days that this type of approach when a young woman had a baby out of wedlock and had her baby taken from her should ever happen again. I think that all of us acknowledge that that was wrong. It shouldn't have happened and Annie should have been able to stay with her birth parents and I think all of us in this House would feel very strongly about that. The Government is working on law reform in this area but it does have complexities and it does have real challenges around the historical wrongs that have occurred. In my electorate I've recently had a constituent come to see me who doesn't have his full story. He has used tools that are available now like AncestryDNA to do his own detective work and has managed to find some siblings but there is still a lot of his journey that he does not know and I couldn't begin to imagine what it must feel like to not have all of your story available to you and to have had that taken from you. So I do want to acknowledge Annie and thank her for bringing this to Parliament. We shouldn't have to do these things through the Parliament but that is the only way at the moment. We will look after your bill we will look after your story and I look forward to being able to progress this as quickly as we can for you so that at least part of your story can be corrected in the history books. So I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise and take a brief call on the Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill and say that ACT will be supporting this joining other parties in this House. I appreciate Chris Penk for providing a good history of how we got to this point and some background into Annie's journey.I think though the overarching point of this bill—and if I refer to a statement from the biography or from her book which is that her life's mission is to correct the law of the past and get archaic outdated and cruel regulations changed. And I think it's fairly obvious that this is probably not it for the broader people that this issue affects but it does make a difference. It doesn't create a legal precedent but it does fix the situation that Annie is in. It raises awareness and puts the spotlight on the issue so that perhaps Parliament in future can look at proper reform because there will be many others in New Zealand in similar circumstances. It's not particularly reasonable to say that for every single person—that legislation on a per-person basis is the answer long term. Certainly there probably needs to be some law changes here.It's particularly important around historical adoption in the baby scoop" era where it says that at one point 76 babies were being given away each week in New Zealand. Historically over 100000 adoptions have taken place and those children—now adults—don't have that legal right to actually have the biological parents put on their birth certificate. So here we are in Parliament doing a bill like this.So I won't take up more time of the House just to say ACT supports this bill we support Annie and we wish her well in her journey. Thank you Madam Speaker."
Bennett GlenGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth): Kia ora Madam Speaker. I want to firstly thank Chris Penk for his contribution and for bringing this piece of legislation to the House and in what he has already said in terms of this being the only legal outlet to bring about the effective change that has been asked for. In the 21st century sometimes we wonder—you know it would seem simple in a stroke of a pen to make a significant change like this but actually it isn't. So again acknowledging Chris Penk in terms of shining a light on some of the challenges that can potentially be unpicked in times to come to ensure that there isn't the challenge or the trauma that people have to go through when they want to make a decision like having their birth parents on their birth certificate. Now in my family my mother was adopted and has been through the experience of searching looking for her birth parents. It was a different time. My mother was born in the early 1940s and it wasn't until her mid-30s that she actually started looking to see if she could find her birth parents. It wasn't until later on that she was able to find her birth mother but no record of her birth father. So for me I have I guess in a different way lived through the challenges of what was back in the day closed adoption and the challenges that closed adoption brought. And also around the feeling often of the State of church organisations that for some reason thought the best idea for a child was for them not to know their lineage not to know their whakapapa not to know the history of who they are. So for me I stand here as someone who knows half my story or maybe close to three-quarters of my story but there is a gap for me in terms of who I am and my history. So as I look at this Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill I'm glad to stand and support it and to encourage us as a House to move forward and support what happens.Chris Penk has made quite clear what this does in terms of Annie being able to have her birth parents' names on her birth certificate. I think it's something that we need to celebrate because it's not easy going through the process of discovering seeking looking finding who you are but it's also the next step to then actually want to have that recognised under law to have your name and your birth parents' name actually registered on a birth certificate for the State to understand.I won't say a lot more because I believe that we just want to get on and support. I imagine if Annie you're watching we as a House want to—I know on this side of the House we want to support your journey. We hope that as you take this next step that you will continue to grow and flourish as you have as you've explored who you are your identity but also now having that recognised.So I'm sure there are many people in this House and I'm sure there are many people around Aotearoa New Zealand—maybe even a couple of people watching tonight—who can fully understand and connect with what this is and the joy but also the challenge that adoption brings. So I support the Annie Oxborough Birth Parents Registration Bill and I commend it to the House.
New Plymouth District Council (Perpetual Investment Fund) Bill — Second Reading
Papers Petitions Select Committee Reports and Introduction of Bills
Robertson GrantSTANDING ORDERSSessionalHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Leader of the House): According to a determination of the Business Committee I move That Standing Orders 148 and 150 be suspended and the following rule adopted:Procedure for personal vote (1)In a personal vote—(a)the bells are rung for the period set out in Standing Order 149: (b)the Speaker directs the Ayes to go to the right the Noes to the left and abstentions to the Table: (c)the doors are closed and locked as soon after the bells have stopped as the Speaker directs and the Speaker then restates the question: (d)all members present within the Chamber or the lobbies when the doors are locked must vote or record their abstentions: (e)the Clerk counts all votes and abstentions and records members' names: (f)the Speaker declares the result to the House.(2)Members may observe the voting in any part of the Chamber and in the lobbies.Motion agreed to.
Robertson Grant; Rurawhe AdrianAPPOINTMENTSAssistant SpeakerHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Leader of the House): I seek leave to set aside Standing Order 29 and to appoint the Hon Poto Williams as Assistant Speaker until the end of Thursday 11 May 2023.SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Rurawhe AdrianPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: No petitions have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. A paper has been delivered for presentation.CLERK: 2021-22 annual report of the Transport Accident Investigation Commission.SPEAKER: That paper is published under the authority of the House. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Reports of the Petitions Committee on the petition of Debbie Port and the petition of Margaret Broughreport of the Regulations Review Committee on the complaint about a specialist optometrist scope of practice and associated prescribed qualification made under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003.SPEAKER: The report of the Regulations Review Committee is set down for consideration. No bills have been introduced.
Rurawhe AdrianWEDNESDAY 10 MAY 2023The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSSPEAKER: E te Atua kaha rawa ka tuku whakamoemiti atu mātou mō ngā karakia kua waihotia mai ki runga i a mātou. Ka waiho i ō mātou pānga whaiaro katoa ki te taha. Ka mihi mātou ki te Kīngi me te inoi atu mō te ārahitanga i roto i ō mātou whakaaroarohanga kia mōhio ai kia whakaiti ai tā mātou whakahaere i ngā take o te Whare nei mō te oranga te maungārongo me te aroha o Aotearoa. Āmene.[Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom and humility for the welfare peace and compassion of New Zealand. Amen.]
Tuesday 9 May 2023 - Volume 767
Social Workers Registration Legislation Amendment Bill — Instruction to Social Services and Community Committee
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Social Workers Registration Legislation Amendment Bill be reported to the House by 24 August 2023 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 193 195 and 196.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 44New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.
11. Question No. 11—Commerce and Consumer AffairsNAISI CHEN (Labour) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer AffairsQuestion No. 11—Commerce and Consumer Affairs11. NAISI CHEN (Labour) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What advice has the Commerce Commission issued to help reduce costs for Kiwis when shopping?Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): The Commerce Commission says Kiwis can take steps to avoid retailer credit card fees and retailers should be more transparent about how consumers can do this. The commission is concerned that many people think they have no option but to pay the surcharge at the end of their transaction. Usually this is not true. You have the option of inserting or swiping your debit or EFTPOS card rather than using the contactless function and this should not incur a fee. The Commerce Commission believes consumers should have the informed choice of which payment method best meets their needs and budget and it is taking action accordingly.Andrew Bayly: That's going to solve the cost of living crisis!SPEAKER: Andrew Bayly will stand withdraw and apologise.Andrew Bayly: I withdraw—and apologise.Naisi Chen: What action has the Commerce Commission taken to support consumers in this matter?Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: The Commerce Commission is reminding businesses that any surcharges must be clearly disclosed and any reasons for the surcharge must be accurately described to avoid breaching the Fair Trading Act. It also noted that businesses should contact their payment service provider if they do not clearly understand the costs they are paying. Most importantly the levels of the surcharges should not be in excess of the costs of accepting the payment.Naisi Chen: What actions has the commission taken to tackle problematic practices by retailers?Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Lots. The commission has published materials to assist merchants who are surcharging to do so appropriately and to ensure consumers know their options. The commission has also written to a number of large merchants raising concerns about the level of their surcharges. In addition to their work with merchants the commission has published an open letter to payment service providers to set its expectations that merchants impose surcharges only in a transparent and fair manner.Naisi Chen: What should Kiwis do when paying at the store if they are concerned about payment surcharges?Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Kiwi consumers should expect that their payment options at the terminal are transparent and fair. If it is unclear they should ask what surcharges are being added to their purchase and whether there are any other payment options with lower or no surcharges. Kiwi consumers can also expect both retailers and their payment service providers to ensure fair and transparent options for payments and should speak up when they have concerns. I am also encouraging retailers and payment providers to follow the commission's guidance. When this happens consumers should start to see some surcharges at the checkout reduced—good news for Kiwi shoppers.
10. Question No. 10—HealthMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 10—Health10. MATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri) to the Minister of Health: Why did a mental health patient wait 94 hours in the Auckland Hospital emergency department in late March and how much has been spent of the $27.45 million announced for crisis mental health services in Budget 2022?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): Firstly the head of the hospital has apologised to these patients and I agree that this kind of experience for patients is unacceptable. To the first part of that question I am advised that the patient arrived at a very busy time in the emergency department and for the acute mental health inpatient service. A suitable bed was not available and the patient was not well enough to be discharged at the time. The staff of the hospital searched tirelessly for a bed until they found one. In the meantime this patient was assessed and treated by staff in a bed in the short-stay unit. To the second part of the question Budget 2022 included a specialist mental health and addictions services package within which is the delivery of eight community-based alternative crisis services across a mix of small medium and large areas of New Zealand. Of the $2.5 million available this year the estimated spend at 30 June will be $825000. The commencement of the spend has been slightly delayed but I am advised that five services are due to begin in June 2023.Matt Doocey: So is the Minister saying on one hand mental health patients are waiting up to 94 hours in emergency departments and on the other hand of the $27.5 million announced for crisis mental health services less than $1 million of that has been spent and can the Minister tell the House what the connection between those two is?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Well it's not for me to tell the House what that member thinks the connection between those two things is because of course it is not clear that that patient would have been suitable to move to a community setting. However I am clear that those services were part of a budget that spending for that rolled up over time and those services are due to start in the coming months.Matt Doocey: How will we ever know whether that patient would have qualified for that crisis mental health service when the Minister has admitted the Government has failed to spend the money promised on that initiative?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I am advised the services will be stood up in June.Matt Doocey: So how will the service that is going to be stood up in June help a patient that waited for 94 hours in an emergency department that was described by one health professional as the longest wait time for a mental health patient ever in New Zealand's emergency department help that person?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I understand the member's frustration with that situation and I have also said that it is unacceptable. But that member makes an assumption about the clinical needs of that patient that neither of us are in a position to make.
7. Question No. 7—HealthDr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour—Banks Peninsula) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 7—Health7. Dr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour—Banks Peninsula) to the Minister of Health: What action is the Government taking to ease winter pressure on the health system?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): Last week I announced the Government's comprehensive plan to ease winter pressure on the health system. This plan is being led by Te Whatu Ora and includes 24 initiatives to help support community care and reduce hospital demand.Dr Tracey McLellan: How will our new national health system help us deliver this plan?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: This winter a reformed health system is allowing us to identify successful local programmes and scale them across the country tailoring any healthcare approach to meet unique needs. Resources will be shared across health facilities within a region with providers working together. Coordination at a national level means the health system is better prepared to respond locally and connect people to share knowledge and deliver services this winter.Dr Tracey McLellan: Can you tell us some of the specific actions in the plan?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Our plan is focused on a combination of improving access to health services for people closer to where they live as well as measures that can help manage the demand for hospital-level care over winter. It includes support for pharmacies to treat minor ailments hospital in the home services increased access to radiology services in the community and community rapid response tools to lessen hospital admissions for our most vulnerable people.Dr Tracey McLellan: How will the plan ease pressure on the health system this winter?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: These initiatives are being driven by Te Whatu Ora to reinforce the message that the care at the right time at the right place is required. They will deliver health services to people closer to where they live ultimately alleviating additional pressure on hospitals. It's important people feel confident they can get the healthcare they need this winter and I'm fully supporting this plan to deliver it.
5. Question No. 5—HousingSHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote) to the Minister of HousingQuestion No. 5—Housing5. SHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote) to the Minister of Housing: What action is the Government taking to support the residential construction sector and increase the supply of housing?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): The residential development construction sector is prone to boom and bust cycles. Following the global financial crisis the supply of new affordable housing dropped significantly which pushed house prices up. To provide some counter-cyclical support the Government is stepping in to support some build-ready developments by purchasing land or underwriting homes off the plans to reduce risk for developers which means we can continue to build affordable homes.Shanan Halbert: How is the Government partnering with developers to continue the delivery of affordable homes?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: We know that we must build our way out of our current housing crisis so it is vital that we maintain momentum in the sector as the headwinds grow. To do this the Government is working with developers to support stalled developments in areas where there is high need for new housing through the Build Ready Development Pathway. Through round one we've supported eight developments across the country enabling 144 homes in Tauranga Hastings and Lower Hutt. A second round which will support more developments opens next week. Shanan Halbert: What other initiatives does the Government have under way to support the delivery of more affordable homes?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The Government is supporting the delivery of thousands of affordable homes across New Zealand through the Government's underwrite for residential housing. Last week I opened Ockham Residential's 117 apartment Aroha development in Avondale. Aroha Ockham's fourth development assisted by the Government underwrite for residential housing KiwiBuild and our Land for Housing programme would not have gone ahead without Government intervention. During a downturn the Government must be an active partner with industry to secure the delivery of affordable homes not just a spectator and we're getting on with the job.Shanan Halbert: And what else has the Government done to enable the delivery of more affordable homes?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The $1 billion Infrastructure Acceleration Fund part of our $3.8 billion Housing Acceleration Fund is supporting the delivery of critical infrastructure projects in 28 New Zealand cities and towns. Combined these projects are expected to enable between 30000 and 35000 new homes over the next 10 to 15 years. Funding recipients have overwhelmingly reported being on track with their programmes with two developments in Waimakariri and Lake Hāwea ahead of schedule with their civil works. I am encouraged to report that across the country there are 71 houses complete 101 under construction and 635 having building consents approved.
1. Question No. 1—Prime MinisterCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central) to the Prime MinisterORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Prime Minister1. CHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement and I quote I think overall there are some New Zealanders who perhaps are not contributing their fair share"?Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Prime Minister): Yes.Chlöe Swarbrick: Has he considered the Minister of Finance's pre-Budget statement: "The Treasury has estimated the cost of asset damage from the floods and cyclone at between $9 billion and $14.5 billion with half of that related to infrastructure owned by central or local government such as roads." and if so does he think that a higher effective tax rate on super-wealthy New Zealanders could allow Aotearoa to better recover from natural disasters?Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In answer to the first part of the question yes.Chlöe Swarbrick: Does he agree with the outcomes of our current tax system which encourages the super-wealthy to accumulate assets such as property and hoard billions to the extent that 311 families in this country hold more wealth than the bottom 2.5 million New Zealanders?Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The Labour Party set out its tax policy very clearly at the last election. We're sticking to that tax policy. We will set out our tax policy for the next election in due course and then we will stick to that as well.Chlöe Swarbrick: Does he stand by his statement then: "The new Cabinet will be focused on core bread and butter issues like the cost of living education health housing and keeping our communities and businesses safe" and if so does he agree that a wealth or capital gains tax would enable greater investment in those bread and butter issues?Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In answer to the first part of the question yes—although perhaps slightly less dramatically.Chlöe Swarbrick: Is it equitable for mega-rich New Zealanders who have a combined wealth of $85 billion to pay less than half the effective tax rate of ordinary New Zealanders as found in the IRD's latest tax report?Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: New Zealanders can make their own judgments on that. That's why the research was done and the report has now been made public.Chlöe Swarbrick: Does he agree that more tax revenue from a wealth or capital gains tax would ensure that Aotearoa had a standard of living that his Government could be proud of?Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Mr Speaker it's a hypothetical question that the member is asking."
Motions — His Majesty King Charles III—Coronation (continued)
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the motion be agreed to.Ayes 106New Zealand Labour 62; New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 3Te Paati Māori 2; Whaitiri.Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Motion agreed to.
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Madam Speaker. I must admit that I'm a little bit perplexed by the contributions from National Party colleagues this evening. If the law is breached yes there is an obligation to ensure that there are tools and architecture to make sure that the law is complied with. I was then also confused by my colleague Melissa Lee's contributions where she lamented the non-investigation of certain breaches. However that's exactly what this bill is there to address in terms of the production of documents. I think it is really worrying when there is a dismissive approach to the experience of exploited migrants. It is not simply an academic spectrum; it's an experience of marginalisation and if you've spoken to migrants who are experiencing cumulative what the Opposition might call lower-end breaches it is an experience of marginalisation and we absolutely must do something to address that. There's a saying that goes Don't confuse justice with the law". Justice is about fairness; it's about just outcomes. The law is about the tools that we need to get to those just outcomes and I think sometimes people believe that if we simply make something illegal like paying someone less than the minimum wage then compliance just follows. In truth there are areas of society by which either their lack of transparency or their architecture leads them away from justice. So I would like to commend the Minister for introducing this piece of legislation to the law and it's a piece of law that recognises part of what I would call the existence of keyhole employers. What I mean by that is that in certain industries where there are cumulative breaches employers have so much control over a workplace that they can essentially close the door and only let you see what they want you to see through that door. The production of documents is really significant here as it does allow the opening of the doors. It is a tool that ensures that we're working towards fairness as opposed to just setting up laws that aren't complied with. There are other aspects of this bill which also will make it more fair in terms of workers who are facing these abuses that other members have spoken to so I will not speak to those. I only say that I commend the Minister and the committee again for their work on this bill and I commend this bill to the House. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members this debate is interrupted and is set down for resumption next sitting day. The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow. Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m."
Menéndez March RicardoRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): I rise on behalf of the Green Party to speak to the Worker Protection (Migrant and Other Employees) Bill second reading. I sat through most of the submissions at the Education and Workforce Committee and I acknowledge the work of the committee. The bill in and of itself creates a kit of infringements that the Government hopes will do some work to stamp out exploitation and we made it clear in the first reading that out of the kits the Government or policy interventions the Government could use we think—and this is one of the areas actually I find myself agreeing with the ACT Party—one of the most effective interventions is to decouple work visas from single employers. But at the same time we do acknowledge that there are unscrupulous employers who are getting away with exploiting migrants with little consequences and so we do think there is worth in exploring a set of infringements to enable employers being held to account and to discourage this type of behaviour. One of the key points that we raised during the first reading which was then echoed by the New Zealand Law Society as well as the Human Trafficking Research Coalition was regarding the use of the information collected as part of this kit for the purposes of future visa applications. During the select committee we were reassured that it could be in theory operationalised to prevent this from happening but we do not think that goes far enough. We do actually think that ideally there should be protections in law that guarantees to migrants that whatever information Immigration New Zealand collates won't be used for the purposes of determining future visa applications. The reason for that is that often exploited migrants are finding themselves breaching their visa conditions as part of the exploitative conditions that they find themselves in and so by not having those protections what we are creating is a situation where migrants may not feel confident being part of that whistleblowing process. We do not think that making changes to the bill that would have enabled and entrenched those protections would have jeopardised the holding of these employers to account and this is why we do look forward to the committee of the whole House process to explore the Supplementary Order Paper that we're going to be tabling on that. So our support will continue to be based on the possibility of making these changes and we look forward to future debates to unpack those. Kia ora.