edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Clark DavidDr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): This is a crap bill. The Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety has failed to ram zero hours down people's throats and here he is trying to undermine the rights of working people once more. He says that people could get on the phone get their lawyer involved and take a personal grievance. Well not everyone has Ken Whitney on speed dial. Many people feel they are under pressure from their employers and they do not have the luxury of a Panama Papers lawyer to give a quick bell to sort things out and to make a bit more money. People in New Zealand are feeling the pressure. The Government has produced very little for middle New Zealand in the Budget. They are feeling the strain. They are working they are trying to keep their employers onside and this makes it a little bit harder for them to spend time with their friends and families. This is one more step down the road to a complete squashing of the rights of working people in New Zealand. That is why I will be standing to oppose this bill. I do not think it is in the long-term interest of New Zealand to continue to squeeze the rights of working people. The Commerce Committee received a letter from Caritas during the proceedings when we heard submissions inviting members of the committee to attend a meeting on Easter Sunday morning. Its staff kindly said to us that the meeting would be at 10.30 on Easter Sunday morning at Hill Street in Thorndon Wellington and although they themselves had plans to be with family the community and church on that day they were willing to sacrifice that to help members of the committee understand the impact of having to work on Easter Sunday. As best I am aware not one member of the select committee wished to take them up on that offer. I think that illustrates the point. We have in this House people willing to make rules that they themselves are not interested in following.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 6 p.m.
Parmar ParmjeetDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): I support these bills and commend these bills to the House. Thank you.Bills read a third time.
Riccarton Racecourse Development Enabling Bill Riccarton Racecourse Bill — Third Readings
Foster-Bell PaulPAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): E Te Mana Whakawā Tuarua tēnā koe. In following on from that rather mean-spirited contribution on this third reading of the Riccarton Racecourse Development Enabling Bill I just want to say that this is a very pragmatic and sensible measure. I do agree with one part of what the member Kris Faafoi said which is that this is necessary. It is necessary because there were 13000 homes lost during the earthquakes in Christchurch in 2010 and 2011. It is very necessary to ensure that there is both a mix of higher-end but also most importantly affordable housing available to the residents of Christchurch. It represents—wasted" is a strong term and the member who has just resumed his seat is somewhat wasted on this debate I feel. I had the benefit of going down and having a look at the Riccarton Racecourse as part of the committee hearing process. There was land there that was not best used. There was considerable land dedicated to what can only be described as a Third World - style ramshackle flea market. It is quite popular among people on one day of the week when they go in to these tents and marquees and so forth to buy and sell and deal in products but it could be much much better used in housing. Having that partnership with Ngāi Tahu and having the city council as it does backing the use of one third of the Riccarton Racecourse reserves—that is only 40 out of the 122 hectares that will be dedicated towards this housing development—I think is a very sensible measure.It is a fine bill. It has been put to the House by the very competent and capable Minister for Building and Housing the Hon Nick Smith and for those reasons I commend it fully to the House."
SpeechThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Before I call a member I would just like to make a quick ruling. Early in Mr O'Rourke's speech members on both sides looked to me when he indicated that he felt that members—one member in particular and possibly one earlier—were not telling the truth. Members looked to me to intervene at that stage.I do want to make it clear that if a member thought that someone was deliberately not telling the truth it would be a contempt of Parliament and a breach of privilege under Standing Order 410(b). The member Denis O'Rourke did not use the word deliberately". I will say this carefully: he did not indicate that the members knew what they were saying was actually untrue or that the action was deliberate. If it was not deliberate and someone was mistakenly indicating something and the member was pointing out that what they were saying is not true that is not a breach of privilege and it is not something that should be interrupted. It is a debating matter."
Hayes JoanneJOANNE HAYES (National): Just before I get into my contribution I just want to make it very clear that the Riccarton racing club came to the Minister for Building and Housing to discuss the lands that we are discussing today in the House. It came and it actually proposed that property be leasehold property. After some discussions with the Minister and to-ing and fro-ing it was the Minister who discussed with the Riccarton racing club the idea of turning that land not into leasehold but into a housing area. And that is what the true story is. That is how the Riccarton racing club ended up with the 40 hectares of land to build these 600 homes on. It is true. The racecourse will continue to operate; the Riccarton Market will continue to operate. There were a lot of community groups in Christchurch watching on with interest as to what would happen to the Riccarton Market and all of them were very happy that even though there is all this development happening they will get to keep their Riccarton Market. I just want to quote from a submission from the New Zealand Racing Board about these bills. It said: These Bills are an excellent example of where racing is able to develop both its own industry as well as making a meaningful and substantial contribution to the local community." That is why it fully supports this bill. Ngāi Tahu Property said that "The passing of these bills into law will mark a great milestone for both the Trustees and NTP enabling the realisation of a vision" that has been around for several years. Ngāi Tahu Property also commented that it was a real privilege for it to be part and parcel of the whole process of the development of the Riccarton Racecourse land. This Government is committed to the 13000 brand new homes that are being built in Christchurch. We will continue to strive to do that. This is one of many projects that are happening within Christchurch. As a new Cantabrian in Christchurch East I believe that a lot of great things will actually come from this. Yes Christchurch East has lost a lot of its houses through the earthquake but this is a step towards making sure that those homes even though they are being built somewhere else—some may even come back to Christchurch East—are actually going to be made affordable for couples. Some may say that $450000 is very expensive. It may be but it is what the market price is. It is what affordable homes are being sold for in Christchurch. These people will also be able to access their KiwiSaver to be able to put forward towards a deposit or to help pay for these homes. As my colleagues have said this is a pragmatic bill. It is a good bill and I have no problems in commending it to the House. Thank you."
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): It is my pleasure to stand in support of the Coroners Amendment Bill. This bill will support coroners in their important and difficult roles by making their system more efficient. That in turn supports grieving families and is another example of this Government delivering Better Public Services. The Justice and Electoral Committee has considered this bill and during the process it received a number of submissions the most significant of course being from the Law Commission which made 17 recommendations. Of those 17 recommendations 14 were accepted in full and three were accepted generally around reporting standards—so all in all a very constructive process.One of the main provisions of the bill is to reduce duplication with other agencies and this will be done by giving the Chief Coroner the ability to direct that a coronial investigation not be required. The Act currently lists 13 different authorities with investigative responsibilities such as the Transport Accident Investigation Commission and a royal commission of inquiry so it is obvious that there are overlaps possible in some cases. Under the current legislation the relationship between coroners and other investigative authorities has not always been clear and that has led to uncertainty about their respective roles. The Chief Coroner after the passing of this bill will have an oversight role and that will allow him to direct that an inquiry not be opened or may not resume or that it be a postponed or adjourned inquiry. On average cases involving an inquest or hearing take over 400 days or over 700 days if the coroner is required to wait for another investigation to be completed. This is far too long for grieving families so providing the ability to reduce this duplication will go a long way towards supporting those families and providing closure. This is a very pragmatic bill and I am very happy to commend it to the House.
Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months' Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — Financial Veto
Brownlee GerryTHURSDAY 16 JUNE 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 28 June the Government will look to complete the Appropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) Bill the Imprest Supply (First for 2016/17) Bill and a number of other bills on the Order Paper. Wednesday will be a members' day.
Wednesday 15 June 2016 - Volume 715
Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a first time.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs) on behalf of the Minister of Local Government: I move That the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) be reported to the House by 28 October 2016.Motion agreed to.
Children Young Persons and Their Families (Advocacy Workforce and Age Settings) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Advocacy Workforce and Age Settings) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 107New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Social Services Committee.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) on behalf of the Minister for Social Development: I move That the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Advocacy Workforce and Age Settings) Amendment Bill be reported to the House on or before 17 October 2016.Motion agreed to.
11. Civil Aviation Authority—ChargesDENIS O'ROURKE (NZ First) to the Minister of TransportCivil Aviation Authority—Charges11. DENIS O'ROURKE (NZ First) to the Minister of Transport: Will the Civil Aviation Authority reduce its charges to its general aviation customers for the 2016-17 year?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): As the member is aware the funding changes for the 2016-17 year were set back in 2012. The authority is currently undertaking a review of its cost recovery framework for its regulatory activities. This is being consulted on and proposals will be considered and decisions made by Cabinet later this year.Denis O'Rourke: Does he stand by the reported statement made during the 2012-13 review of Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) charges by the then Minister: For the period for the next funding review that is 2015-18 the Civil Aviation Authority will look to decrease costs so that fees and charges reflect full cost recovery from 2015-16 and the need for further increases is reduced or removed."?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Well I cannot say for certain that the Hon Gerry Brownlee said that just like I cannot say for certain who collects the member's mail. I just think there are some things we may never know the truth on. Denis O'Rourke: We certainly will not know the truth of anything that Minister says.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member is in danger of me just moving to the next question. Let us just have the supplementary question.Denis O'Rourke: Is it true that the full cost recovery rate now is $466 per hour compared with the rate at the time the then Minister made his reported statement of $288—an increase of 62 percent?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I do not think that is true Mr O'Rourke.Denis O'Rourke: What actions has he taken to ensure that the CAA has taken genuine robust and disciplined measures to ensure that the costs passed on to civil aviation customers are driven down and not increased? And try telling the truth again!Mr SPEAKER: Order! If I hear that sort of interjection again from that member he will be leaving the Chamber. Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I think there has been a very full consultation and there have been I think at least two proposals by the Civil Aviation Authority and two rounds of consultation. As I say at this stage they are just consultations; decisions have not been made. I suggest the member chills and waits for the Government's decision. Denis O'Rourke: Will the Minister assure general aviation customers that CAA charges for next year will either be reduced or at least be no greater than they were as a result of the 2012-13 review; if not why not? And let us have a meaningful answer!Mr SPEAKER: Order! I gave the member full warning. I told him to sit down after asking his supplementary question and not interject across the House like that. We are moving immediately to question No. 12."
10. Workplace Health and Safety—AsbestosTODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland) to the Minister for the EnvironmentWorkplace Health and Safety—Asbestos10. TODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland) to the Minister for the Environment: What steps is the Government taking to reduce the risk of New Zealanders being exposed to asbestos-containing products?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): Cabinet has made a decision to ban the importation of asbestos-containing products. This regulation is required because the risk to the health of workers and the environment is not just from raw asbestos which is currently banned but also from products containing it. Asbestos is the No. 1 occupational health killer in New Zealand relating to 170 deaths per year. This measure will reduce that risk in future.Todd Barclay: What evidential basis did the Government use to make its decision to ban asbestos-containing products?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Last year the Royal Society of New Zealand published its report on asbestos risks beyond the workplace and concluded that it would be prudent for New Zealand to ban those products that contain asbestos. The new prohibition will come into effect on 1 October and arises from the inventory that my ministry did where we are now satisfied that there are alternatives. The regulations will provide a narrow range of exemptions as is similar in other countries for areas like vintage aircraft where there is no alternative and where there are proper safety systems around the asbestos that is provided.Todd Barclay: What steps is the Government taking to reduce the risk from asbestos products already here particularly in buildings that may be in the process of being demolished or upgraded?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: New health and safety in work regulations were put in place by this Government in April this year in respect of asbestos. They specifically require and detail the management of asbestos to ensure that it is disposed of safely. The combination of these regulations that ban the importation of new asbestos-containing products as well as the new regulations for dealing with the asbestos that is here will help reduce the appalling toll of 170 deaths per year in future.
8. National Certificate of Educational Achievement—2015 ResultsDr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister of EducationNational Certificate of Educational Achievement—2015 Results8. Dr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister of Education: What reports has she received on the final NCEA results?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. I was pleased to announce this morning the best-ever results for National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA). Final results for 2015 show roll-based level 1 2 and 3 NCEA achievement rates rose by between 1.5 and 3.2 percentage points last year to respectively 74.4 percent 76.4 percent and 62.7 percent. The proportion of students gaining university entrance also increased by 3.1 percentage points. Dr David Clark: Standards are dropping.Hon HEKIA PARATA: It is clear that the—actually standards are going up. It is clear that the hard work of our teachers principals and kids is paying dividends. I congratulate them all on their efforts—well certainly this side of the House congratulates them all on their efforts.Dr Jian Yang: How does more young people with NCEA benefit New Zealand?Hon HEKIA PARATA: Achieving NCEA level 2 in particular is the passport to success. Since this Government took office in 2008 level 2 achievement rates have risen 16.6 percent. That means thousands more kids every year are gaining the skills and qualifications they need to undertake further training education or enter the workforce. However we will not be satisfied until all young people are getting the start they need in life.
7. Business Taxation—Religious ExemptionDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Minister of RevenueBusiness Taxation—Religious Exemption7. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Minister of Revenue: Does he think the tax system for New Zealand businesses is fair and equitable?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Revenue): Yes and we are making it even fairer more equitable and easier through the Business Transformation project funding and the small business tax package announced in Budget 2016.David Seymour: Does he think taxpaying New Zealand businesses would be comfortable knowing that neither Sanitarium nor Mission Estate Winery pay company tax due to their advancement of religion being categorised as a charitable purpose and will the measures he just alluded to address that question?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: As the former chief executive of an organisation led by a religious order and a non-taxpaying entity I am very aware of the issues that they raise. Many of those organisations distribute profits for charitable work particularly that proportion that they would otherwise pay in tax. It was reviewed by the previous Government and it was found that there was no case for changing the status quo. David Seymour: Does he think it is fair on typical taxpaying New Zealand businesses when we have examples like the failed French company Gameloft of My Little Pony fame having its corporate tax rate—which presumably was nothing—offset by a $2.9 million Government grant funded by other taxpayers?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I have no knowledge I am sorry to say of that issue. But I would be very happy to address it if the member puts it down in writing.David Seymour: Would it not be fairer and more equitable to simply cut the company tax rate for all New Zealand businesses rather than have these various transfers grants and loopholes?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: The Government is committed to a broad based - low rate tax system and it is being held up as just that. I am satisfied that we have a tax framework that creates the right incentives for growth and profit.David Seymour: How can the Minister say he is satisfied with our company taxation system when the OECD says we have the fourth-highest effective tax rate on capital in the developed world?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: The member refers in his question to capital and obviously that is an issue that is a live one—one that the Tax Working Group looked at in detail in 2009. The Government did make some changes to the way in which the tax framework worked but we are satisfied with the place that we have got to.
4. Refugees—Quota and SupportJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of ImmigrationRefugees—Quota and Support4. JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Immigration: What recent announcements has the Government made to support refugees?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Immigration): The Government recently announced the first increase in nearly 30 years to the refugee quota from 750 places to 1000 places annually from 2018-19. The Government is presently providing 500 places to Syrian refugees over the next 2 years. On top of this New Zealand provides 300 places under the refugee family support category and considers and approves nearly 175 asylum cases every year. Combined these numbers comprise nearly 1500 places for the world's most vulnerable people to be settled into New Zealand.Jonathan Young: What else is the Government doing to support refugees?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: This Saturday the Prime Minister will officially open the new facility at the Māngere Refugee Resettlement Centre—a $25 million investment in refugee resettlement. That centre has been the first stop for refugees coming to New Zealand for the last 70 years and the upgrades to the centre have transformed it into a state-of-the-art facility that will give all future refugees the best possible start in New Zealand. We know it is the people providing support to the refugees who matter but the building will be a fantastic environment within which to make their home for the first 6 weeks.Iain Lees-Galloway: Why will he not simply follow the advice of Amnesty International and the Red Cross and double the quota? When the Prime Minister says that we have got $3 billion for tax cuts and that we have got $20 billion for the Defence Force why can he not find the resources to double the quota?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I think that is a question that he could ask of his own party when it was in Government for 9 years and did absolutely nothing. I am very proud of the response that this Government makes to refugee—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! A question was asked—it was a relatively political question—and the answer should then be able to be heard by everybody including myself. I cannot hear it above the barrage I am picking up from my left-hand side. Does the Minister wish to continue?
3. Social Housing Minister and Building and Housing Minister—ConfidenceANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime MinisterSocial Housing Minister and Building and Housing Minister—Confidence3. ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that I expect high standards from my Ministers and I hope they maintain those standards … if they don't then obviously I will take action if necessary"?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes I do.Andrew Little: Does Paula Bennett's failure to ensure that families have houses to live in meet with his high standards?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I reject the proposition.Andrew Little: Was it in keeping with his standards for Paula Bennett's office to smear a marae for doing what she has failed to do namely helping homeless families?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The Government has made it quite clear—the Minister and myself—that we do not condone the actions of the staff member but we are also aware that the Minister was not aware that the staff member had spoken to a journalist. As soon as she became aware of that she apologised.Andrew Little: Was it in keeping with his standards for Paula Bennett to mislead the media by saying the homeless don't want help?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have not seen that quote and I would need to see the context in which it was made.Andrew Little: Does Nick Smith's failure to do anything to stabilise house prices and arrest the fall in homeownership meet with his high standards?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: If I contrast the actions of Nick Smith as Minister of Building and Housing with the housing Ministers in the previous Labour Government then I have great pride in the work he is doing because at least he is doing things. Although I am a little reluctant to read too much into 1 month's data we can see even today that Auckland house prices are going up a little less than the rest of the country.Andrew Little: Was it in keeping with his standards for Nick Smith to blame the housing crisis on Kiwis for not being educated enough while protecting foreign speculators that Minister Smith says do "diddly-squat"?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The member is just making it up.Andrew Little: Does anyone in his Government take responsibility for anything anymore or is it just an endless exercise in passing the buck?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Of course the Government takes responsibility. We take responsibility for the fact that the country is growing strongly. We take responsibility for the fact that the books are back in order. We take responsibility for the fact that we are the first Government in decades to raise benefits. We take responsibility for the fact that under this Government the refugee quota will be raised. We take responsibility for the fact that through the worst of times we stood behind the most vulnerable New Zealanders. We take responsibility for the fact that we stood behind the people of Christchurch. We take responsibility for the fact that we have undertaken more elective—Mr SPEAKER: Order!"
Foster-Bell PaulPAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā. In taking a brief call on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) a bill in the name of my hard-working and I think very pragmatic colleague the Hon Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga I just want to say that this is a very sensible measure. It was a bit rich to be lectured by the member Phil Twyford who has just resumed his seat in such supercilious tones about scapegoating local government. I do not think we on this side need to be lectured about scapegoating from that particular member.There are examples of these measures in place. You can look to the Wellington region where you can see the efficacy of leveraging off region-wide cooperation in utilities—in water for instance—but you can also see massive room for improvement. For instance our regional council has a woeful track record on transport within our region. Unfortunately the leadership of our city council here in Wellington has not been ideal. We have not moved ahead as a city. There is an opportunity to correct that in the local body elections at the end of the year but this bill also goes a very long way and is very positive. I for those reasons commend it to the House.
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): It is a pleasure to rise and speak in support of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) in its first reading. After those contributions from the Opposition I would just like to return to planet Earth. I feel like every time we talk about local government the conspiracy theories come out the tinfoil hats get put on and we hear very much about the Roswell Area 51 Coalition"—hearing about what is happening out there in the wide universe. But back on planet Earth—Tracey Martin: How much are you paid?MATT DOOCEY: Thank you Tracey Martin for being my main fan club member and who thinks we are still on Back Benches.But I would just like to say what a fantastic bill this is and what a great initiative from our Minister of Local Government this is. As a very hard-working electorate MP—Tracey Martin: Ha ha!MATT DOOCEY: —as Ms Martin will know one of the biggest issues that comes through the office is that constituents are very concerned you know? They want to get the economy right from their rates with local councils and they want to ensure councils are taking every step to improve their efficiency and to get good outcomes with their services. This legislation will give them a vehicle for councils to work smarter more economically and more effectively. Look in Canterbury there are a range of territorial authorities. I do not think anyone is looking for amalgamation. We are all pretty parochial and proud of our patches. But what we can do around economies of scale—especially in my area which is quite rural. We look at Hurunui and "Waimak" joining together to deliver better services and pretty much this is what this bill is about. We have got some great learnings post-earthquake in Greater Christchurch and we have had some really strange outcomes when we were looking at implementing new roading infrastructure for Greater Christchurch. You have one council investing heavily into a new motorway and then you have another council that is voting down the motorway's extension into the city and it is just not good for all the people within those jurisdictions. They expect better from their councils and that is why these council-controlled organisations will allow more integration they will allow more economies of scale and overall I think they will provide efficiency and effectiveness for ratepayers. I commend the bill to the House."
Hayes Joanne; Tisch LindsayJOANNE HAYES (National): I stand to take a short call on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) in the name of the Hon Sam Lotu-Iiga in its first reading. It is common knowledge that councils currently face a number of challenges due to the demographic changes economic shifts and the environmental pressures that they face. Technology is changing and so too must councils. This is what this bill is all about. It is not about building up shared services; it is about the provision and the ability to have a number of council-controlled organisations to help them all. We have heard from Ron Mark the member across the way there about the councils in the Wairarapa and what they are doing but not all small councils do that and this bill will help enable them to do that. It will allow them to take responsibility for developing refining and consulting on the reorganisation of the council and on the proposals that are coming through that they will receive. It will equip them with a number of tools without them losing sight of the local preferences. This is a good start. It is a good bill. I welcome it to the select committee. I want to also support the words that were spoken here tonight by the Minister in his opening kōrero and I also want to support the words that came from the chair of our Local Government and Environment Committee. I think it is a good way forward and I commend it to the House. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. I call Eugenie Sage—5 minutes.
Korako NukNUK KORAKO (National): Ā mauri ora e Te Mana Whakawā. It gives me pleasure to stand in support of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2). Just briefly just to cover off again which was done quite admirably by our chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee this particular bill gives a lot more options for councils to create a better delivery of core services. It also gives the Local Government Commission more support around councils and it gives the Local Government Commission more oversight and statutory guidance. One thing that I thought was interesting particularly from the Minister who introduced the bill Hon Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga is that there has been quite a lot of consultation already around this new legislation and particularly with local authorities across New Zealand; iwi which to me is really important; Local Government New Zealand; the New Zealand Society of Local Government Managers; the New Zealand Council for Infrastructure Development; chambers of commerce; and also Business New Zealand. This particular piece of legislation is another very very typical piece of legislation that has been introduced by this Government. It is very common-sense it is down to earth it is logical it is practical and it is realistic. I commend this bill to the House. Kia ora.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): What a pleasure it is to stand and speak in support of the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Advocacy Workforce and Age Settings) Amendment Bill 2016. What a great privilege it is to be a member of the National Party and to be here to witness this historic and radical change to the way we respond to the needs of our most vulnerable young people and their families.This bill will amend the Children Young Persons and Their Families Act 1989 and enables the first step in the overhaul of the current system. The main objective of this bill is to make the system child-centred. It ensures that young people's views are taken into account when decisions are being made about their care. No longer will State care be done to them; it will be done with them. This Government is absolutely committed to the new operating study. We understand and accept the findings in the report of the expert panel that was appointed to lead this overhaul of the care and protection system and we welcome the reforms ahead of us. I have great pleasure in commending this bill to the House. Thank you.
Parmar ParmjeetDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): Thank you for the opportunity to take this call on the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Advocacy Workforce and Age Settings) Amendment Bill in its first reading. I am taking a short call to support this bill. This is a huge step in a positive direction to improve the lives of children and young people who come into State care. It is not acceptable for it to continue the way it is because the outcomes that we are getting for children and young people who come into State care are terrible. We are bringing these children into State care from their families because their families are unable to look after them but there are some statistics that made my heart sink. The first is that the average age of children who come into contact with Child Youth and Family is 7 to 8 years and by this age some of these children have already gone through a number of placements. I believe that children of that age should just be thinking about studying or playing not thinking about the next family they will be placed into. There is no certainty for them there is no stability for them and there is no family to bond with. The second statistic is that 64 percent of 61000 notifications to Child Youth and Family are repeat notifications. So we are not able to get the results that we want for these children and that is why they keep coming back to Child Youth and Family. There was a study done on children born in the 12 months to 1991 and this study was done when they were 21 years old. This study found that 90 percent of these people were on a benefit—we are talking about children who were put into placement care—and out of this 25 percent of them were on a benefit with a child. The same study found that almost 80 percent of them did not have a National Certificate of Educational Achievement level 2 qualification 30 percent of them had a youth justice referral by the age of 18 and 40 percent of them had gone through a community sentence. We are taking these children from their families and into State care and what we end up doing for them is putting them on a benefit getting a low education outcome for them and referring them to the youth justice or the corrections system. So I am really happy to see that the Minister is taking charge of this situation. This bill will reform the current system so that we can have that long-term view and the kind of support we need for getting the desired outcomes for children who come into State care. There is no quick fix but we cannot continue the way we are doing it at the moment because we cannot get better results by just continuing the way we are doing it. I am looking forward to working on this bill in the select committee process. I support and commend this bill. Thank you.
Taxation (Annual Rates for 2016-17 Closely Held Companies and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading
Ross Jami-LeeJAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany): I do not intend to talk for as long as Mr Tabuteau did on this bill. I congratulate him on that very well-drawn-out effort on this bill. This bill contains a range of very well-meaning changes to tax law—none that are overly earth-shattering though. As a number of speakers have pointed out already it does contain a range of matters that improve the tax legislation in this country particularly with regard to ensuring that we continue to level the playing field between New Zealand companies and overseas companies. This bill also contains that wonderful clause—that wonderful yes" clause—the "Annual rates of income tax for 2016–17 tax year". Of course this bill continues with the Government's approach to taxation which is to ensure that we maintain important public services and fund those through taxation but not tax people through the teeth like we see other parties in this House have been proposing. I am sure that if we were discussing this bill and Grant Robertson had written this bill—long may that not be the case—we would probably be discussing annual rates that would be far higher than those we are discussing today with all of the huge multibillion-dollar promises that Labour has been making so far and without counting of course the Green Party promises that they will have to include once their marriage goes a bit further. The annual rates that we would be looking at in a bill like this would be much scarier.As members have commented quite collegially already today it is going to be a good opportunity at the select committee to look at the many measures in this bill and hear from tax experts about how we can refine those further. I always find that tax bills like this that go through the Finance and Expenditure Committee attract very high-quality and very technical submissions which aid the committee well and the committee always does work very well together in trying to find changes to the bill that improve it and ensure that we are passing good-quality tax legislation. It is a long bill with well-meaning changes and I am happy to look forward to the select committee process later on."
Points of Order — Immigration (Refugee Quota) Amendment Bill—Leave to Introduce
Motions — United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities—Election of Robert Martin
Roche Denise; Carter DavidPOINTS OF ORDERLeave for Introduction—Immigration (Refugee Quota) Amendment BillDENISE ROCHE (Green): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to introduce the Immigration (Refugee Quota) Amendment Bill in my name and for the bill to be set down for the first reading next members' day.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is.
Tolley AnneWEDNESDAY 15 JUNE 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.MOTIONSUnited Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities—Election of Robert MartinHon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): I seek leave to move a motion without notice or debate that this House congratulate Robert Martin on being elected to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I just need to put the leave first. Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection to that action being followed? There is none.Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I move That this House congratulate Robert Martin on his election to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and acknowledge that Robert has made history as the first person with a learning disability to be elected to a United Nations committee.Motion agreed to.
Tuesday 14 June 2016 - Volume 715
Social Security (Extension of Young Persons Services and Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 182 in the name of the Hon Anne Tolley and the following amendments in her name to clause 5 and clause 33(2) be agreed to:in clause 5 replace Social Security (Fraud Measures and Debt Recovery) Amendment Act 2014" with "Social Security Amendment Act (No 2) 2015".in clause 5 in the table item replace "Part 4" with "Part 5".in clause 33(2) replace "Part 3" with "Part 4".in clause 33(2) heading to new Part 4 of schedule 32 replace "Part 4" with "Part 5".A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the following amendments in the name of Carmel Sepuloni to clause 16 clause 17 clause 27 and clause 42 be agreed to: in clause 16 section 88I(6A)(b) after "NCEA level 2 or an equivalent" insert "or higher".in clause 17 after new section 123E(2) insert:(3)Any young person is entitled to receive services referred to in subsection (1)(a) if they are:(a)not in full-time employment; and(b)not a full-time student; and(c)a beneficiary or have applied to be a beneficiary.After clause 27 insert27ASection 170 amended (Youth support payments: obligations)replace section 170(4) with:(4)Where a young person receiving a young parent payment is the principal caregiver of his or her youngest dependent child the obligation in subsection (1)(a) begins to apply (in relation to the young person) only on the day on which the child becomes 3 years old.in clause 42 regulation 3A(2)(g)(iii) after "NCEA level 2 or an equivalent" insert "or higher".A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 60New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Noes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Parts 1 and 2 schedule and clauses 1 and 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Parts 1 and 2 schedule and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.Bill to be reported with amendment presently.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Coroners Amendment Bill with amendment the Riccarton Racecourse Development Enabling Bill with amendment the Riccarton Racecourse Bill without amendment and the Social Security (Extension of Young Persons Services and Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill with amendment.Report adopted."
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes 88New Zealand National 59; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 32New Zealand Labour 32.Clause 1 agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to clause 2 be agreed to:replace 1 July 2016" with "the day immediately after the expiry of the period of 1 month that commences on the date on which this Act receives the Royal assent".Amendment agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That clause 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 88New Zealand National 59; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 32New Zealand Labour 32.Clause 2 as amended agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That clause 3 be agreed to.Ayes 88New Zealand National 59; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 32New Zealand Labour 32.Clause 3 agreed to.Bill to be reported with amendment presently."
Coroners Amendment Bill — In Committee
Appropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Appropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 12.Bill read a first time.
12. Teachers and Education Leadership—Prime Minister's Education Excellence AwardsKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister of EducationTeachers and Education Leadership—Prime Minister's Education Excellence Awards12. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made to celebrate the very best in teaching and leadership?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): Last night the Prime Minister and I were delighted to announce the winners of the annual Prime Minister's Education Excellence Awards. The awards celebrate the very best in teaching and leadership and recognise the importance of community and parental engagement. McAuley High School in Ōtāhuhu won the supreme award by creating an environment for educational achievement based on high expectations and strong parental and community connections. The other category winners were: for excellence in leading Rotorua Boys' High School; for excellence in teaching and learning Te Puna Reo o Puhi Kaiti Gisborne; for excellence in governing Rangitoto College Auckland; and the 2016 Education Focus Prize: Health and Well-being went to Karanga Mai Young Parents' College and Early Learning Centre Kaiapoi. I want to congratulate all our winners and acknowledge the more than 200 awards' entrants. Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: What other initiatives are in place to strengthen and raise the status of the teaching profession?Hon HEKIA PARATA: The Teacher-led Innovation Fund supports teachers to develop innovative practices. The first round of the fund has been completed with 40 research proposals receiving funding. I recently announced its extension for a further 2 years taking the total amount invested to support innovative teaching practices to $18 million over 5 years. We have also established the independent Education Council to strengthen and raise the status of the profession. We have re-focused teacher professional learning and development on maths science reading and writing as priority areas. We have created new career pathways for teachers in the 117 Communities of Learning. We have also trialled post-graduate teaching programmes like Teach First NZ. Great teachers great early learning and great schools transform lives. We want to raise the status of the teaching profession so that more of our kids grow up wanting to become great teachers themselves.