edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Young Jonathan: Consumer Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
Young Jonathan: Consumer Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
: 
 I am pleased to stand and support the Consumer Law Reform Bill which is now before the House for its first reading. The previous speaker Clare Curran made mention of the different Ministers who have had input and I think what that shows to us is that the creation of law is quite a process when you consider the different Ministers the different officials the fact that we are debating it that it will go to a select committee that the general public will have a say and that different people in the sectors will be able to come in and make their own submissions. It shows what a robust process we actually have here in New Zealand. Of course today Mr Deputy Speaker you are presiding so congratulations on your reappointment as well. 
The Consumer Law Reform Bill is a bill called an omnibus bill which amends a number of Acts as we know: the Fair Trading Act the Consumer Guarantees Act the Weights and Measures Act the Carriage of Goods Act the Sale of Goods Act and the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Act. It also repeals the Auctioneers Act 1928—that is going a long way back—and the Door to Door Sales Act 1967 the Layby Sales Act and the Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1975. So there are a lot of Acts of Parliament that are being amended improved or updated and some repealed in this piece of legislation. In fact it has been 20 long years since this amount of work has been done and I think that is a considerable length of time. 
I watch quite frequently—and no doubt many others do—the programme on TV called  
Fair Go 
. I think for every New Zealander when it comes to transacting business parting with their hard-earned money or when they want to receive a good or a service the thing that they want to see is value for that money. They want a fair go. They want to know that what they have paid for and what they thought they were going to get they do get. And at times of course that is not the case which is why we have programmes like  
Fair Go 
 why we have legislation and why we have enforcement. 
It is important for this to bill to proceed and make good progress. So I look forward as a member of the Commerce Committee to being able to really get into the nitty-gritty of this. It is touching so many areas. I think this is a bill that is coming to the House in good time and we look forward to the progress that it shall make. Thank you.
Upston Louise: Taxation (International Investment and Remedial Matters) Bill — Second Reading 
Upston Louise: Taxation (International Investment and Remedial Matters) Bill — Second Reading 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I am pleased to support in its second reading the Taxation (International Investment and Remedial Matters) Bill. 
Bill read a second time.
Graham Kennedy: Taxation (International Investment and Remedial Matters) Bill — Second Reading 
Graham Kennedy: Taxation (International Investment and Remedial Matters) Bill — Second Reading 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) 
: 
 This bill the Taxation (International Investment and Remedial Matters) Bill seeks to change New Zealand tax law specifically the Income Tax Act 2007 around gains from income in overseas companies and gains by foreign investment in New Zealand companies. 
The main changes are threefold. First it relaxes what is known as the thin capitalisation rules. These rules are designed to deny interest-related tax deductions to multinationals that use debt as a way of avoiding a tax liability here. The Inland Revenue Department claims that the new laws adopted as recently as 2009 have created some unfair consequences for resident companies investing abroad. Secondly it extends the active income exemption to New Zealand businesses operating offshore and rationalises the international tax calculation methods. This brings New Zealand into line with overseas practice freeing companies here from a tax cost they do not face elsewhere. Thirdly it removes the 2 percent tax or levy on bond issues for non-resident investors. This follows one of the recommendations of the Capital Market Development Taskforce. It effectively lowers the cost of raising funds from offshore. 
So what is the likely fiscal cost of these changes in terms of lost company revenue? They are estimated to be somewhere around $15 million in the first instance $10 million in the second change and $5 million in the third—that is to say $30 million all up. This package of company tax totalling $30 million of course pales in the light of the $1.5 billion of company tax cuts already announced by the John Key Government which Todd McClay spoke of so effusively just a moment ago. 
Todd McClay 
: Thank you. Thank you. 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM 
: You are welcome. 
And what are the political implications of this bill as well? The provisions of the bill are complex in their detail—ironically because as Clayton Cosgrove said just a moment ago we are all in favour of simplification in our tax laws. But most of them involve a similar kind—generally a broad trade-off as the Green Party said in the first reading; that is lower company tax revenue versus the risk of company emigration offshore. This creates a problematic tension between a race to the bottom with company tax breaks in a race we cannot win in the long term or the loss of tax revenue and jobs as companies move offshore motivated by tax reasons. Each of these cases is slightly different so we may support some measures while not supporting others. 
We shall vote for this bill in the second reading but as a general principle we should not support the slow erosion of our tax base for unquantifiable theoretical gains. Better to understand our natural advantages and play to them while simultaneously extending our efforts abroad in international forums to agree to satisfactory environmental labour and tax standards.
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Address in Reply 
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Address in Reply 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National) 
: 
 I move  
That this debate be now adjourned 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
10. 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector 
: What recent announcement has she made in her portfolio that will benefit communities? 
Hon JO GOODHEW (Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector) 
: 
 On 3 February I announced grants from the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust to 15 individuals at an average of $5000 each—a total of $75000. This covers overseas travel typically for between 3 weeks and 3 months to learn more about other people and cultures. The trust places great importance on the benefits of this project to New Zealand. 
Tim Macindoe 
: What will this year’s Winston Churchill Fellows study? 
Hon JO GOODHEW 
: This year’s recipients will study across a wide range of very interesting topics including community welfare and health disaster preparedness and issues relating to history commerce the arts and the environment. 
Tim Macindoe 
: Can she give the House an example of how these grants can benefit a community? 
Hon JO GOODHEW 
: Fellows return with new insights and understandings that do enrich their communities in many ways. The range of topics I have already given the House is broad. I have seen an example of a fellow who after studying transportation and traffic issues is putting that to good use within his business sector and I am sure that the Associate Minister for Primary Industries is putting the knowledge and experience he gained in the year 2000 of beef exports to the United States to very good use.
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
6. 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
 to the  
Minister of Local Government 
: What reports has he received on increases in local government council debt since the Local Government Act 2002 was enacted? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 The local authority financial reports show that council debt has quadrupled from $2 billion in 2002 to over $8 billion today. The increase in debt is significantly greater than any other sector and is noted by local government analyst Larry Mitchell to be the No. 1 issue facing that sector. 
Jacqui Dean 
: Has local government borrowing slowed in response to the global debt crisis in the same way that households and businesses have become cautious of debt? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: No household debt grew sharply between 2000 and 2008 but stabilised in 2009 and has reduced in 2010 and 2011. Farm debt has also responded prudently to the global financial crisis and not increased since 2008. In contrast council debt has been growing at a faster rate—$500 million of borrowing in 2007 $800 million in 2008 $1100 million in 2009 and $1800 million in 2010. This ongoing increase in local government debt is not sustainable. 
Jacqui Dean 
: Why is this increase in debt a concern? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: There are three concerns. The first is that council debt is actually just rates deferred. The greater the debt the less opportunity there is in future for containing the cost of rates for households and businesses. Secondly council debt contributes to New Zealand’s overall indebtedness. Households and businesses are doing their bit by pulling back their borrowing and local government needs also to tighten its belt. My third concern is that for some councils their level of debt-servicing costs is becoming so great that it puts the financial viability of their council at risk.
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
3. 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he stand by his statement that his hour-long show on Radio Live on 30 September 2011 was an “election free zone”? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery) 
 on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes. 
Grant Robertson 
: Did he or his office seek or receive advice from the Electoral Commission on whether the “hour with the PM” show could breach electoral broadcasting law; if so what did that advice say? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am informed the Prime Minister’s office discussed the matter with the broadcaster. Radio Live I understand then sought advice from the Electoral Commission. After receiving that advice Radio Live decided to go forward with the programme. 
Grant Robertson 
: Will the Prime Minister be declaring the value of an hour of free radio time as a donation as required under the Electoral Act? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The Prime Minister has no obligations under the Electoral Act. 
Grant Robertson 
: Has the Prime Minister received any advice as to the value of an hour’s air time on Radio Live and was this reflected in the declaration of donations for that period? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am unable to answer that question at this point. 
Grant Robertson 
: If the show was an election-free zone as the Prime Minister has said and he was not there for the purpose of getting electoral advantage for himself and the National Party what reason did he actually have for hosting the show? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Thousands tens of thousands hundreds of thousands millions of New Zealanders find everything he says just fascinating. 
Grant Robertson 
: Has he or his office sought advice as to whether he has abetted a crime under section 66 of the Crimes Act by hosting the “hour with the PM” on Radio Live? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: This matter is currently referred to the police. The police are investigating Radio Live in this matter.
Draft transcript - Tuesday 07 February 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Tuesday 07 February 2012
Banks John: Election of Speaker 
Banks John: Election of Speaker 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
Hon JOHN BANKS (ACT—Epsom) 
: 
 On behalf of the ACT caucus can I congratulate you on your reappointment. We have known each other a long time and I am very grateful for that. Your mother and father would be very proud of you today Dr Smith that in this exalted role you have done so well and served the country so well. You have brought a lot of grace and dignity to the role of Speaker and to this place for which the whole country is grateful. While in exile I got a lot of opportunity to witness this place in action. You have done a remarkable job. 
Finally can I thank you for the enthusiastic welcome that you gave me when I arrived back here this morning. It was surpassed only by a security guard on day one when I arrived here 2 weeks and 2 days ago when he said: “It’s so good to see you again Winston.”
Smith Lockwood: Election of Speaker 
Smith Lockwood: Election of Speaker 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
Mr SPEAKER-ELECT 
: My colleagues thank you so much for those very kind comments and for the confidence you have shown in me. I just hope I can live up to that confidence you have shown in me today.
Dunne Peter: Election of Speaker 
Dunne Peter: Election of Speaker 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 Mr Speaker-Elect as one of the now dwindling band of fellow 1984 intake members may I congratulate you Mr Speaker-Elect most warmly on your re-election to the most elevated post in this Parliament. You showed in your first term that you were prepared to take on the challenge of treading the very fine line between upholding the standards dignity tradition and history of this place and starting to modernise and make more transparent and open many of the processes by which we operate. You succeeded admirably in that task and I think that for those who doubted your resolve your determination and your dedication you also showed very quickly that you were not going to be trifled with on that score. I think most members of the House would acknowledge the huge contribution you made in that respect. 
A new Parliament has been elected and with it come new challenges. The composition of the House has changed somewhat. Those of us who are familiar with your ways will no doubt slip comfortably back into cooperating with you and acknowledging you as appropriate. There will be others who will have to be guided and educated. I am sure that we who have been here for some time will stand by ready to assist you in that process. But I suspect that our assistance will be superfluous because your ability to win the confidence of the House to impose a standard of order and conduct that befits this place was well established in the last term. 
Like the House has unanimously I have confidence that you will continue to impose that same standard and that same level of performance during the coming term. My warmest congratulations.
Harawira Hone: Election of Speaker 
Harawira Hone: Election of Speaker 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Leader—Mana) 
: 
 Kia ora tatou. Hoi ano hai korero tuatahi me mihi atu ki a koe e te Kaiwhakawa o to tatou nei Whare i tenei ra. Tautoko ana au i nga mihi katoa kua tukuna atu ki runga i a koe me te mea ano hoki tautoko ano hoki i te korero a Metiria kia noho tahi tatou a tona wa kia korero i nga korero mo tetahi oati pai e pa ana ki a tatou o roto o Aotearoa i tenei wa. 
[ 
Greetings to us. Indeed the first thing for me today Mr Speaker-Elect of this House of ours is to acknowledge you. I endorse all the acknowledgments bestowed upon you and support Metiria’s statement as well for us to sit down together in the near future to discuss a more fitting oath that is relevant to us of New Zealand at this point in time 
.] 
Congratulations Mr Speaker-Elect on taking on that most onerous of tasks: trying to keep that side and this side acting in the best spirit of the House. I look forward to the opportunity to sit down with you and others in the very near future to talk about the way in which we might advance the notion that the oath better reflect who it is we are in Aotearoa our Treaty and the people we represent. Tena koe huri rauna kia ora tatou katoa.
Draft transcript - Wednesday 21 December 2011 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Wednesday 21 December 2011
Tuesday 8 August 2017 - Volume 724
Valedictory Statements
Employment (Pay Equity and Equal Pay) Bill — First Reading
Hayes JoanneJOANNE HAYES (National): I stand to take a brief call on this very good pay equity bill. I have been in a number of jobs—I have had many jobs—and not one time have I ever thought that I was getting underpaid or not paid as much as what my male counterparts were. I have worked in a shearing shed; I got the same amount as what everybody else got doing the same work.Anyway I think that this is a very good bill. It is a start. Everybody in this House is in favour of pay equity; the approach is just different. Ours is a sensible measured approach whereas the Opposition just wants to get in there and just go ahead and do it to the employers. Well you just cannot do that. We are taking this measured approach.I do support this bill and I look forward to it going to select committee because that is where the debate will actually occur—in there—so that this legislation can come back to this House and be passed. I recommend the bill to the House. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Just—[Interruption] Order! [Interruption] Order! Just a matter of clarification—is it going to be a split call or just—Kris Faafoi: No.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Poto Williams.
Appropriation (2017/18 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading & Imprest Supply (Second for 2017/18) Bill — Second Reading (continued)
Appropriation (2017/18 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading & Imprest Supply (Second for 2017/18) Bill — Second Reading
Imprest Supply (Second for 2017/18) Bill — First Reading
Joyce StevenIMPREST SUPPLY (SECOND FOR 2017/18) BILLFirst ReadingHon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Finance): I move That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2017/18) Bill be now read a first time.Bill read a first time.
Appointments — Independent Police Conduct Authority
Mark RonRON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take a very short call to firstly thank the outgoing chair of the Independent Police Conduct Authority Judge David Carruthers a sterling chap from Pahīatua in the Wairarapa and a good friend—I thank him for the service that he has done for this country and wish him well in the future—and to note the appointment of Judge Colin Doherty and to wish him well.Motion agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Appropriation (2017/18 Estimates) Bill be now read a third time and the Imprest Supply (Second for 2017/18) Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Appropriation (2017/18 Estimates) Bill read a third time.Imprest Supply (Second for 2017/18) Bill read a second time.
Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers
12. Forestry Regulations—AnnouncementsIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Associate Minister for Primary IndustriesForestry Regulations—Announcements12. IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Associate Minister for Primary Industries: What recent announcement has the Government made regarding forestry regulations?Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Associate Minister for Primary Industries): Earlier today Dr Nick Smith and I announced a new nationwide set of environmental rules for managing New Zealand's 1.8 million hectares of plantation forestry. Forestry is New Zealand's third-largest primary industry but its efficiency is hampered by the confusing mix of planning rules across our 86 councils. This new national approach will better protect the environment while improving productivity by reducing consenting costs and applying consistent environmental standards. This new national forestry standard is an important part of the Government's Resource Management Act changes facilitated by amendments passed in May and aimed at getting better environmental outcomes with less cost and bureaucracy.Ian McKelvie: How will these regulations benefit the forestry industry?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: The forestry industry will benefit from having a set of consistent regulations to operate under. Planning rules at local government level mean there could be as many as three sets of regional or district plan rules. The forestry sector employs over 26000 people and exports in total around $5 billion a year. So removing this uncertainty will encourage greater investment in a significant contributor to our economy especially at the regional level. More plantation forestry will provide a variety of environmental benefits including improvement in water quality carbon storage habitat for indigenous species and stabilisation of erosion-prone land. The standards come into force on 1 May 2018. They will be implemented over a 9-month period and key stakeholders will be consulted to ensure an effective roll-out.
11. Immigration—Fraudulent Visas and Exploitation of International StudentsRt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Minister of ImmigrationImmigration—Fraudulent Visas and Exploitation of International StudentsRt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): Supplementary question—Mr SPEAKER: We will have the primary question. [Interruption] Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Primary question—[Interruption] I got ahead of myself. It will happen in this campaign. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am just trying to get a bit more silence.11. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Minister of Immigration: Does his Government take immigration fraud seriously; if so how?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Immigration): This Government takes any type of visa or immigration fraud very seriously. We have done this by investing heavily in verification and risk resources including a world-class identity management system that enables face photos and fingerprint information from applications to be captured online and automatically matched against personal data held by Immigration New Zealand. We also amended the Immigration Act in 2015 so that residence-class visa holders are liable for deportation where it is established that any of the information provided in relation to their application was fraudulent false misleading or any information was withheld.Rt Hon Winston Peters: If any of that is remotely true what is his priority to manage fraud in the Mumbai and New Delhi offices and why has he excluded the Manila Beijing Shanghai and Hong Kong offices where fraud updates for March 2017 to his department identified fraudulent document concerns regarding hundreds and hundreds of applications?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Immigration New Zealand has been working very hard in that Mumbai market particularly in those high-risk areas in the north of India. But I stress the Indian market is a valuable one for export education but it also carries risks not only to New Zealand but to a number of countries that trade in international education. We have seen significant reductions in the number of fraudulent visas. The decline rates are now starting to drop and there has been a 90 percent reduction in fact year on year in terms of fraud detection.Rt Hon Winston Peters: How can a self-respecting First World country like New Zealand have a Mr Big and an old boys' club controlling the Indian student market exporting Indian students as cheap labour and charging them up to $20000 just to get a job? Why do you not do the world a favour and resign?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I would encourage the member if he has any information other than that which he got from the Radio New Zealand website to provide it to the immigration authorities. I frankly will not be holding my breath.
9. Mining on Conservation Land—New Talisman Gold MinesCATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) to the Minister of ConservationMining on Conservation Land—New Talisman Gold Mines9. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) to the Minister of Conservation: Does she support the locking of gates across public walking tracks on conservation land to facilitate mining?Hon MAGGIE BARRY (Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage): If it is appropriate to protect the public from danger then of course I do. If decisions of that kind are made they are made by the operational people on the spot. I am sure Department of Conservation (DOC) staff always weigh up public access and safety and I support them to make the appropriate decisions.Catherine Delahunty: Why has she allowed New Talisman Gold Mines to restrict public access to conservation land—Hon Simon Bridges: You guys know about restricting access to people at the moment.Catherine Delahunty: —and prospect for industrial gold mining in an area described Simon by the Hauraki District Council as a national attraction and one of our most valued assets."?Hon MAGGIE BARRY: I think I got the gist of that. It is the same refrain. The area of land that the member refers to is very small—0.3 hectares around 230 metres. It is in a relatively low area of public use. It does not affect access to other parts of the park. It is a temporary closure between 5 June and 9 September. The alternative would be putting the public at risk. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will have just the supplementary question.Catherine Delahunty: Will she support the petitions of 20000 people seeking to protect Mount Karangahake from mining by advocating for its inclusion in schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act?Hon MAGGIE BARRY: No I will not.Catherine Delahunty: Does she think that the 50000 people who marched down Queen Street in 2010 to oppose mining in conservation land have now changed their minds and welcome mining in precious places like the Coromandel Forest Park at Karangahake?Hon MAGGIE BARRY: The protest that the member is referring to was around schedule 4 land. This is not schedule 4 land; it is not protected. It is land that has been mined for more than 100 years and is now in a temporary permit and a temporary closure for 3 months. The member is getting well ahead of herself."
5. Tourism Infrastructure Fund—AnnouncementsMAUREEN PUGH (National) to the Minister of TourismTourism Infrastructure Fund—Announcements5. MAUREEN PUGH (National) to the Minister of Tourism: What announcements has she made about the Government's Tourism Infrastructure Fund?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Tourism): Last week I announced that applications are now open for the first round of the Government's new $100 million Tourism Infrastructure Fund. With tourism booming creating employment in our regions and in our cities throughout New Zealand we acknowledge that there is some pressure on infrastructure and this fund is now open for councils to apply to.Maureen Pugh: How does the fund work?Hon PAULA BENNETT: The first round will focus more on helping communities in the most immediate need of assistance. To give an example for the mid-sized facilities grant that we previously had for $5.2 million we were able to get 28 projects under way. This is a $25 million a year fund so we will be able to have a number of projects particularly for those councils that have a low ratepayer base but high visitor numbers. Maureen Pugh: What other support is the Government providing for tourism infrastructure in the regions?Hon PAULA BENNETT: Budget 2017 also included a $76 million fund for the Department of Conservation. That is to upgrade tourism infrastructure which is used by both visitors and New Zealanders to look at some other short and great walks throughout New Zealand to advertise that there is more than just the Tongariro Crossing and to acknowledge that there are needs around toilet facilities and car-parking.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): It is my pleasure—and I am very proud—to stand up in support of this bill tonight the Employment (Pay Equity and Equal Pay) Bill in its first reading. This bill is in the name of the Hon Michael Woodhouse. I have worked my whole life as a woman and I have never in my whole life had any differential in the pay that I have received. I am very fortunate in that respect but I do understand that there are some professions where that is not the case for some women and this bill seeks to address that. Equal pay is the principle where men and women receive the same pay for the same job. Pay equity is the principle where men and women receive the same remuneration for doing jobs that are different but of equal value. There are some measures that are already under way that encourage women into high-value professions. For instance this Government is actually leading by example. We have now a record number of women ever on State sector boards. That is now over 43 percent. Police has introduced a target of 50 percent women recruits and Treasury is also running a gender and ethnicity programme to ensure that there are equal numbers of women participating. New Zealand does seek to close that gender pay gap. We are consistently ranked the lowest gender pay gap in the OECD—it does not matter how you measure that. But we do not want to be sitting on our laurels. This bill is going to further address that gap. This Government is committed to working with New Zealanders men and women and I have faith in the wise minds of the select committee to work on this bill and deliver it back to this House for further discussion. I have pleasure in commending it to the House. [Interruption] The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! The next call is a split call. Denise Roche—5 minutes.
Imprest Supply (Second for 2017/18) Bill — Third Reading
Mitchell MarkIMPREST SUPPLY (SECOND FOR 2017/18) BILLThird ReadingHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Defence) on behalf of the Minister of Finance: I move That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2017/18) Bill be now read a third time. Bill read a third time.
Davidson MaramaMARAMA DAVIDSON (Green): I rise to indicate the Green Party's support for the motion to appoint Judge Colin John Doherty as the chairperson of the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) for a term of 5 years commencing on 31 August this year. It is important to have this independent authority to ensure that we have got the sufficient checks and balances on the conduct of our police. The role of the IPCA is to receive complaints—(i) alleging misconduct or neglect of duty …" by any member of police or "(ii) concerning any [police] practice policy or procedure …" affecting a complainant or to investigate incidents in which a member of the police "acting in the execution of his or her duty causes or appears to have caused death or serious bodily harm …".On that I wish to acknowledge the outgoing authority chairperson Judge Sir David Carruthers. I acknowledge his work such as the authority's report of September 2016 which found that police are more likely to let off non-Māori with warnings—that is that police are less likely to use their discretionary power to offer a pre-charge warning as an alternative to prosecution for minor offences for Māori. Sir David Carruthers in his role as chair noted the possibility of differential treatment on the basis of ethnicity and said that "Pre-charge warnings are more likely to be given to non-Māori offenders than to Māori offenders."During his time in charge Sir David Carruthers oversaw several large investigations including those into the Urewera raids and the Roast Busters scandal. The IPCA's reports on both matters were highly critical of police finding the raids unlawful and the Roast Busters investigation full of deficiencies. Carruthers a staunch advocate of restorative Justice recommended in his report on the Urewera raids that police apologise in person to those they had wronged.The incoming appointment His Honour Judge Colin Doherty is the National Executive Judge of the District Court of New Zealand. He has been a District Court judge since 1997 following 20 years as a practising lawyer. Judge Doherty is also an Alternate Judge of the Environment Court and a Justice of the High Court of the Cook Islands. He has previously served as an Associate Judge of the High Court of New Zealand and a Justice of the Supreme Court of Samoa. I look forward to the newly appointed Judge Colin John Doherty taking the helm of the IPCA and upholding the important work of keeping police conduct to account. Thank you."
Wednesday 8 March 2017 - Volume 720
Housing Corporation (Affordable Housing Development) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Housing Corporation (Affordable Housing Development) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 59New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Noes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
Crimes (Increased Penalty for Providing Explosive to Commit Crime) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Crimes (Increased Penalty for Providing Explosive to Commit Crime) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 105New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 31; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 15Green Party 14; ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Law and Order Committee.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Debate on Budget Policy Statement
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the House take note of the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement 2017.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Motion agreed to.
11. Roading Taranaki—Accelerated Regional Roading ProgrammeJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of TransportRoading Taranaki—Accelerated Regional Roading Programme11. JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Transport: What updates can he provide on the Government's Accelerated Regional Roading Package?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): The Government continues to make strong progress on delivering its package of accelerated regional roading projects across New Zealand. It was my pleasure to recently open a new section of State Highway 3 north of Normanby in Taranaki. We have invested $18 million to realign and improve the capacity and safety on this important stretch of road. The local community has as I know the member knows well campaigned passionately for much-needed safety upgrades to the road which has a history of serious and indeed fatal crashes. That is why I am proud that the Government has been able to step in and deliver a new road that will reduce the risk of crashes and significantly cut travel times for road users.Jonathan Young: What other projects is the Government delivering through the Accelerated Regional Roading Package to improve safety and support economic growth in Taranaki?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Supporting the growth of Taranaki through the transport network is a real priority for the Government. That is why we are stepping in and investing $135 million on the Mount Messenger to Awakino tunnel bypass projects as well as a range of safety improvements along State Highway 3. The bypasses and other planned safety improvements will ensure that this important stretch of road is safer and much much more reliable to travel on. All up this and other projects demonstrate the Government's strong ongoing commitment to investing in Taranaki and its transport development and economic growth.
9. Tax System—Multinational EnterprisesBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country) to the Minister of RevenueTax System—Multinational Enterprises9. BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country) to the Minister of Revenue: What is the Government doing to ensure all companies operating in New Zealand pay their fair share of tax?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Revenue): Last week the Minister of Finance and I released three consultation papers proposing new measures to strengthen New Zealand's rules for taxing large multinationals. A broad-based low-rate tax system works very well for New Zealand overall but it is important to keep it evolving. New Zealand salary and wage earners do not get to structure their arrangements to avoid paying tax and nor should big multinational companies. This is about making sure all companies operating in New Zealand pay their fair share.Barbara Kuriger: How will the proposals address base erosion and profit shifting? Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Base erosion and profit shifting or BEPS are tactics used by some large multinationals to minimise their exposure to tax and move profits out of a country. The proposals released last week are in line with recommendations from the OECD's BEPS project which has developed best practice measures for the global response to BEPS. We have taken a strong but measured approach which prioritises the specific problems that the Inland Revenue Department has actually observed in its investigations of multinationals. The proposals are aimed at tackling concerns about multinationals shifting profits from their New Zealand sales offshore even though these sales are driven by New Zealand - based staff; preventing multinationals using interest payments to shift profits offshore; and implementing New Zealand's entrance into an international convention for aligning our double tax agreements with OECD recommendations.
6. Small Businesses—RoadshowsSTUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister for Small BusinessSmall Businesses—Roadshows6. STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister for Small Business: What recent announcements has she made regarding support for small businesses in regional New Zealand?Hon JACQUI DEAN (Minister for Small Business): Today I announced that the Government is extending the small business roadshows going to another 10 regional centres in 2017. These roadshows are for small businesses to help them navigate the support and information available to them. Last year's roadshows were very well attended and reinforced how important it is to continuously engage with small businesses and how critical it is to increase the visibility of support that they can access. This is why I am committed to extending the small business roadshow programme. Stuart Smith: How is she supporting earthquake-affected areas such as Kaikōura through the 2017 roadshows? Hon JACQUI DEAN: Today I announced the first roadshow for 2017 will be held in Kaikōura. Kaikōura and the surrounding areas have a particular set of circumstances to navigate. This roadshow will support small businesses in the area with a particular focus on earthquake recovery - related matters. I have also announced that the next roadshow will be held in Blenheim. Blenheim had a roadshow that was scheduled last year but was postponed due to the earthquake. Nuk Korako: How is she supporting Māori business and enterprise through the 2017 roadshows? Hon JACQUI DEAN: This year there will be two roadshows specifically designed for Māori business. These will be held in Kaitāia and Whakatane. Māori businesses are a growing part of the economy and it is important we support them. I am also talking to my ministerial colleagues and Government partners about further opportunities to support Māori business and enterprise.
4. Justice Sector Fund—InitiativesSARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill) to the Minister of JusticeJustice Sector Fund—Initiatives4. SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill) to the Minister of Justice: What recent announcements has she made about justice sector investment?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister of Justice): Today I announced that the justice sector has allocated $257 million of savings since 2012 into justice sector initiatives. The Justice Sector Fund enables underspends across all justice sector agencies to be retained and reused to fund projects that support the reduction of crime and allows agencies to trial new initiatives that deliver better results for New Zealanders. Since 2012 60 initiatives across the five justice sector agencies have been funded. Once the initiatives have shown that they are effective they are then able to seek long-term funding through the annual Budget process.Sarah Dowie: What are some of the key initiatives that have been funded by the Justice Sector Fund?Hon AMY ADAMS: The initiatives funded by the Justice Sector Fund since 2012 include a suite of family violence initiatives totalling $15.4 million including over $2 million for the roll-out of the Integrated Safety Response pilots in Christchurch and Waikato; $8.4 million into restorative justice programmes to reduce reoffending; $14.2 million into mental health services across the justice sector and an additional $1.2 million for the alcohol and drug treatment courts; $2.3 million for community and iwi panels that respond to low-level offending and address factors related to offending; and the Department of Corrections' Out of Gate programme to support the reintegration of prisoners on their release. These initiatives alongside many others and the work that the five justice sector agencies do make significant differences in how we protect New Zealanders.
Student Loan Scheme (First Home Repayment Diversion) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Domestic Violence—Victims' Protection Bill — First Reading
Mallard TrevorThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Before I call Clayton Mitchell—I chose not to interrupt the member—I do want to remind people of the rules of how people address other people in the House in involving their surnames. I feel a little bit like Judy Small—you know Don't be too polite.""
SpeechJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): I would have to say that this bill is about a very serious topic; that seems to have eluded some members of this House who have laughed at different aspects of it. Even the faux gravitas of the previous speaker Ron Mark is somewhat alarming. I say this because we actually live in a nation of relative safety compared with other nations of the world.I hold in my hand a report from the Parliamentary Office of Science & Technology from the Houses of Parliament in London. This paper speaks about explosive injury. None of us would laugh about this subject if we were in the House of Commons; we would be quite serious I think. I think that we ought to have a degree of sobriety around this topic because it is speaking about a form of injury of people. We are not talking about somebody sticking a bit of dynamite on to a safe and running away and blowing it up; we are talking about how explosives are used these days to create multiple severely injured casualties in a single incident. We are talking about the form of injury that explosives create and that we want to do something about that so that the supply of them is seen in a far more serious light than a maximum penalty of 2 years.If I can let me speak just briefly about a few aspects of this horrendous form of injury that would help us I think understand that this is something that the select committee ought to seriously consider. I probably do agree with the former speaker Ron Mark who looked at this length of term of imprisonment of 5 years and I think that because of what these sorts of injuries can do we need to look at something a little bit greater than that.There are multiple forms of explosives as we know. There is an initiator of an explosive there is gas and there is ejecta that happen. The trigger excites the explosive main charge and a chemical reaction converts the explosive into a hot high-pressure gas producing a shock or high pressure wave. The shock wave and the hot high pressure gas released by the explosive propagates through its surrounding [casings]." This is quite interesting because modern technology—not ancient technology—is quite devastating. "Gas: expands [rapidly] under pressure typically in excess of 1 million times that of the Earth's atmosphere at 6000°C." So let us have some I guess consideration of those issues. "If trapped the gas vents through gaps in the fractured container and soil at [approximately] 4 km per second".So what I am saying is that these elements are devastating and we ought to have in regard to this bill I think some consideration around how we can see the sentencing around people who perpetrate knowingly who are involved in the supply chain of such elements who have no regard for the fact that it can create impartial injury. We ought to ask the select committee to look at this with great seriousness and look at whether those sentences are indeed adequate. Thank you I am very happy to commend this bill to the House. Thank you very much to Alastair Scott for bringing it to the House."
SpeechKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): First of all I would like to congratulate the member on bringing this bill to the House. I know it is a great honour to have a bill drawn from the ballot. In 9 years I have had one bill drawn. Some members have good luck; they get a few bills drawn consequently.The main purpose of this bill the Crimes (Increased Penalty for Providing Explosive to Commit Crime) Amendment Bill is to increase the penalty from 2 years' to 5 years' imprisonment for providing explosives to commit an offence.It is important and we need to understand that we have to make sure members of our society feels safe in their homes and their communities. It is very important because if we do not feel safe in our homes or in our communities it means that we are not safe anywhere. This Government has been having this agenda to increase the resources and increase the penalties for people convicted of committing crime. National has been building on this for the last 9 years and this is a good gesture on behalf of the Government from the member who has brought this bill to the House.This bill will ensure that nobody provides tools to commit crime. This bill will be a deterrent. The previous speaker was saying that convictions have been low but I think it is important that we should have the appropriate provisions whereby a person who is convicted is given a proper conviction and penalty so that he is not going to reoffend. That will really help us to reduce reoffending because this Government has got a target of reducing reoffending by 25 percent.We hope that the tougher sentences provided by the courts will help to make society secure. This bill is a part of that. National has removed the eligibility for parole for first repeat violent offenders who commit the worst crimes with the three-strikes law. Mr Assistant Speaker I am coming back to the bill but I am just adding that what we have done in the past 9 years is relevant to the bill. It is part of the deterrent that we think will reduce reoffending. These are the things that we have to understand.We have to think about a few things that are set out in this bill. The legislation is to commence on the day after the date on which this Act receives the Royal assent." as clause 2 states. We hope that in the select committee there will be some interest from the public in making some submissions. The committee is excited to have this bill in front of it to process it and to report it back to the House as soon as possible. Once again I acknowledge the member Alastair Scott for bringing this bill to the House. I support this bill."
SpeechCRIMES (INCREASED PENALTY FOR PROVIDING EXPLOSIVE TO COMMIT CRIME) AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 7 December 2016.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Members when we were last debating this bill Alastair Scott had the call and he has 6 minutes remaining to speak if he wishes.
Visitors — Malaysia—Delegates Sabah State Legislative Assembly
SpeechWEDNESDAY 8 MARCH 2017Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.VISITORSMalaysia—Delegates Sabah State Legislative AssemblyMr SPEAKER: Honourable members I am sure that members would wish to welcome Yang Berhormat Datuk Haji Ahmad Bujang and other delegates from the Sabah State Legislative Assembly of Malaysia who are present in the gallery.