edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Borrows Chester: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6446. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Leave is put for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Ross Jami-Lee: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6443. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I move That the question be now put.
Ross Jami-Lee: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6438. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I move That the question be now put.
Scott Alastair: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeScott Alastair: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): The previous speaker Dr David Clark obviously has some sort of selective hearing. The exemption of a family home does not increase compliance. The increase in compliance is relevant to offshore purchasers of property; it is not aimed at the 99 percent of Kiwis who own their own home and will only ever have one home. So there is no issue. That is why there is an exemption—it is just common sense and it is a very simple concept to understand. The house with the “greatest connection” is quite clearly where the person spends most of the time has their family and there is a case for it being where their heart is. That is the home where the person has the greatest connection and it is very sensible and very much common sense and one only needs to think in a practical and reasonable manner to understand what a home is and which home would be of the greatest connection.This legislation is not aimed at the average Kiwi person. It is aimed as the Minister for Land Information has said at the speculator and it is aimed to gather information so that we can understand who is buying the houses and how long they are holding them for. It is part of a suite of legislation and we have already talked about the brightline test legislation in its first reading. This is the bill that gathers that information which enables more work to be done around assessing what is only fair and reasonable—that is to tax people who are gaining speculating and making profit through trading of property. Although that is already in the tax legislation  this bill makes the intention to tax those who purchase a property with the intention of making a profit much more clear.So this is all that this legislation is doing: it is clarifying and making very clear that the aim is to tax those who buy a property with the intention of making a profit whether they are New Zealand residents or reside offshore. This legislation is a way of forcing people to reveal information about themselves and reveal information around their tax status in their offshore country. It forces them to identify themselves by making it compulsory to get a bank account and an IRD number as the Minister has said to go some way—or a long way—to nail potential money-laundering.It is not as complicated as the Opposition would make out. It does not create the loopholes that are suggested. It is very simple. The house with the greatest connection is the main home and that is the house that will be exempt from these information-gathering regulations. I commend the bill to the Committee.
Upston Louise: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUpston Louise: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Land Information): I do want to put on record firstly my thanks for the work that the Finance and Expenditure Committee has done. I appreciate that a truncated period of time makes that challenging so I do want to just first of all put that on record and also I appreciate the officials who have worked very closely with the select committee.I do want to make sure that those who are listening to this debate are clear about the intention of this legislation. It is one of a number of measures and pieces of legislation that we announced in Budget 2015 that are predominantly about making sure that we collect tax from property speculators and there is a view from some that that is a component of housing affordability. So I do want to correct the member Grant Robertson who spoke before me. The intent of this bill is not to have a register; the intent of this bill is to make sure that those who have houses those who invest in housing particularly those who are speculating pay their tax fairly and squarely where it lies.As I said this is a suite of a number of pieces of legislation. Another bill was introduced yesterday around the brightline test. Actually there are a number of pieces in this puzzle to make sure that hard-working New Zealanders are comfortable and confident that somebody who speculates in property in New Zealand whether they live in New Zealand or are from overseas pays the tax that is due. So that is why in terms of the exemption for the majority of New Zealanders who own their own home or live in their own home this does not apply to them. That would have been incredibly bureaucratic. What we are trying to do in this Government is make sure we do not create additional rules and regulations for no reason.This bill exempts the majority of homeowners who buy their own home and who may sell it change it in 5 years’ or 10 years’ time so that there is not a requirement on them to provide this information. The bill is very clear about those whom we want to collect tax from to make sure that we have the right information so that the Inland Revenue Department can enforce actions on those property speculators. Also I think an important point that has not been raised today is that it also makes sure we have information to ensure that New Zealand and housing in New Zealand is not used as a place to launder money. Thank you.
Mallard Trevor: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: General Debate[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! The member’s time has expired.
Carter David: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: General Debate[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: The member’s time has expired.
Fox Marama: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFox Marama: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.MARAMA FOX (Co-Leader—Māori Party) to the Minister for Social Development: What is she doing to investigate any concerns raised by families who are being denied access to their children in care because of Child Youth and Family processes?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): Access to a child in care is a decision for the Family Court and Ministers are unable to interfere. Child Youth and Family’s role in these cases is to implement the rulings of the court. If anyone contacts my office with specific concerns about a child I immediately ask officials to look into the matter but as I say access to children in care is a matter for the Family Court and I cannot interfere.Marama Fox: Will she be establishing an independent authority to investigate claims by parents who feel they have been alienated by Child Youth and Family through dubious practices?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: As the member is aware I have commissioned an expert advisory panel to look at a complete overhaul of the Child Youth and Family systems. In the terms of reference for that panel there is specific mention of examining the adequacy of the current independent oversight advocacy and complaints mechanisms for Child Youth and Family. When that final report comes to me at the end of the year with a newly designed system the panel will have addressed that issue I am sure.Marama Fox: In light of that answer can the Minister give whānau assurances that if they have been poorly dealt with prior to that announcement they will be heard and have a place to hear their claims?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: There is at the moment a complaints process that people can use. But I say to the member that my hope is always that Child Youth and Family keeps focused on what is in the best interests of the child and all too often it seems to the outsider that custody and access fights are normally more about adult agendas. So yes there are review mechanisms at the moment but I say to that member that I have asked the expert panel to have a good look at how adequate they are and whether they are independent enough and to bring recommendations into a new system at the end of the year.
Macindoe Tim: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) to the Minister of Transport: What update can he provide on progress with construction on the Government’s Waikato Expressway Road of National Significance?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): The $2.1 billion Waikato Expressway started under this National Government as one of our seven roads of national significance is a crucial part of supporting a strong and growing regional economy. It was my pleasure to recently turn the first sod of construction on the $458 million Huntly section of that expressway. The 15-kilometre Huntly section is the fifth section to be built and will connect to the already completed Ōhinewai section in the north and to the Ngāruawāhia section in the south. Construction of the Huntly section is an important step towards completing the entire 102-kilometre Waikato Expressway project by 2020.David Bennett: What benefits will the Waikato Expressway deliver?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I am glad the member for Hamilton East asks. There will be tremendous benefits in terms of reducing congestion in terms of reliability—Sue Moroney: No it doesn’t. It doesn’t do that at all.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Oh so Sue Moroney does not want it. Sue Moroney does not want it.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just finish the answer quickly.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: And there will be benefits in terms of massively much safer roading. The Government is committed to this important project for the people of the Waikato.Sue Moroney: What update can he provide on the reasons why international airline Jetstar decided not to establish flights to and from Hamilton?Mr SPEAKER: It has very little to do with the primary question.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: The Leader of the House has the right to raise a point of order.Hon Gerry Brownlee: The question that is set down for answer relates to the Waikato Expressway. I simply wanted to point out to the member asking the question that an expressway is not a runway.Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! There will be another front-bench member on my left getting a similar warning very shortly. I have considered the question again. It is so far from the primary question that it is not in order to ask it.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: This is a point of order I might remind the people on my right.Chris Hipkins: You could interpret the primary question in that way but the first words of the primary question were “What update can he provide”. The supplementary question asked by my colleague Sue Moroney asked for a similar update on a different matter.Mr SPEAKER: A good try—a gallant try indeed. It would have been a perfectly satisfactory question yesterday but it is out of order on this occasion.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The level of interjecting coming from one particular member again has been absolutely consistent throughout question time. It will cease or the member will be leaving the Chamber. [Interruption] Order! It could happen quicker than the member might expect.
Macindoe Tim: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West):Thank you Mr Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Transport: what update can he provide—[Interruption] What update—
Carter David: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 SeptemberText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 September[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard enough. No if the member would only go back again and look at Hansard he would see that my response was that I would certainly have a look at the questions and the answer. I specifically said I would not necessarily come back to the House. I did have a look at the questions and answer and I am quite comfortable that the questions were answered according to the Standing Orders. The particular problem in the question that was raised is that it was a supplementary question that arose from a very unspecific primary question: “Does the Minister stand by all his statements?” or words to that effect. Therefore the adequacy of the answer in my opinion was consistent with the Standing Orders and if the member wants to have a look at Speakers’ rulings to help him I suggest he looks at pages 198 and 199.
Mark Ron: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 SeptemberText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 September[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: A fresh point of order?RON MARK: Yes. I raised with you yesterday an issue regarding a question that was put by the Rt Hon Winston Peters to the Minister for Māori Development. It was taken on behalf of the Minister by the Hon Chris Finlayson. In giving answers to that the Hon Chris Finlayson said that the question should have been directed to the Minister for Whānau Ora. I asked you to consider that firstly the report was commissioned by the Minister for Māori Development it was released by the Minister for Māori Development and of course the Minister for Māori Development is also the Minister for Whānau Ora. You were going to deliberate on the Hansard and come back and advise the House whether or not that question could have been answered—
Carter David: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 SeptemberText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 September[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I thank both members for their contributions. I will certainly have a very close look at the matters raised by Chris Hipkins. I will certainly come back to Chris Hipkins. If I feel it requires information coming back to the House then I will do so as well.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 SeptemberText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 September[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I would point out that if information has been provided to a select committee during the annual review and the review is being conducted through the House then that information is available to all members.Secondly I think that if you are going to have a look at the way in which Ministers are answering questions I would hope that you look at the questions that are being asked. It is an important aspect of our democracy that members representing Opposition parties—or any member of Parliament—can ask written questions of Ministers but they do have to be reasonable questions. I think when they are in the nature of a fishing exercise then they are probably going to get a broader sweep of answers or an answer that gives a broader sweep of potential answers in order to make sure that the greatest amount of information is captured by the intention of the answer—therefore the referral to an annual review which of course is an extensive document with many many questions in it.
Hipkins Chris: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 SeptemberText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Points of Order — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers Question No. 9 to Minister 8 September[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would like to ask you to give a considered ruling with regard to written parliamentary questions and answers to written parliamentary questions supplied from Ministers and the growing practice of Ministers to simply refer to either the annual review process or the estimates process when given questions that relate to financial performance or spending decisions by Government departments. The increasing practice of Ministers has been to simply say that this information is supplied to select committee X or whatever and to please refer to those answers.There are two things that I would like you look into with regard to that. The first is that that information is not necessarily available to all members and any member has a right to question a Minister regarding those matters of financial performance. In some cases the matter could still be before the select committee so it is not available to all members.The second of course is that it may not have even been asked for in the first place. So although extensive questioning goes on during those processes what we are finding is that some of the information asked for in written parliamentary questions has not even been asked for through the annual review or estimates processes.So those are the issues that I would like you to look into and give a considered ruling on because the written parliamentary questions process is a very important part of the Opposition’s ability to hold the Government and Government departments and agencies to account for the use of taxpayer funding.
Seymour David: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British MonarchText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSeymour David: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British Monarch[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I would like to join with other members in supporting the Acting Prime Minister’s motion to congratulate our Queen. I think we in New Zealand are very lucky to have an extremely stable and extremely efficient system of governance and the Queen is an integral part of that. The performance of that system over a record of 63 years now is very much down to one individual who very much personifies the moniker “Our Gracious Queen”. Thank you.Motion agreed to.
Dunne Peter: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British MonarchText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDunne Peter: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British Monarch[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future): I want to join with other members in commemorating this unique occasion that sees Queen Elizabeth II become Britain’s longest-serving monarch attaining some 63 years and 217 days since her accession in February 1952.The Queen has exemplified the concept of service throughout her time in public life and her humility and commitment have set standards that others would be well advised to follow. Although she may be an elderly woman now she still reads her papers every day and according to all of the speculation is still up to a weekly encounter with her Prime Minister the 11th of her reign where she can test him on the current issues of the day and the way in which her Government is behaving.She joins a very rare pantheon of rulers. Queen Victoria has been referred to—she is still a little way short of the last Austro-Hungarian Emperor Franz Josef who served approximately 68 years but they all pale into insignificance behind Louis XIV of France who was King for about 73 years. The Queen may well yet outlive them all.
Mark Ron: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British MonarchText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British Monarch[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): It is with great pleasure that New Zealand First rises to congratulate our Sovereign Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II on a significant milestone in this second Elizabethan age. It is particularly satisfying for those of us in the New Zealand First caucus who are holders of a Queen’s commission. Her Majesty is of course the longest-ever reigning monarch of New Zealand let alone the 15 other realms that proudly have her as their head of State. What is more she is the sixth monarch of New Zealand since 1840 and it is perhaps fitting that she has now overtaken the first Queen Victoria.Although there are some in this House with republican ideals we are proud that New Zealand First is not among them. In our offices we have posters of Her Majesty the Queen of New Zealand for which we thank Monarchy New Zealand. The monarchy is as much about heart as it is about head. It gives us a sense of something much bigger than ourselves that we have links to—Richard the Lion-heart Henry V and of course the first Elizabethan Age which is in essence the British component of our New Zealand whakapapa—which gives us a greater sense of history.Her reign was spectacularly kicked off by the conquering of Everest by Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing. Sir Edmund Hillary is a person whom many republicans throughout New Zealand have always identified as being the only other person whom they would imagine being the head of State should the Queen not be. Our Queen has served her countries with honour and distinction. She pledged so many years ago that whether her life be long or short she was committed to the service of her people. Thankfully it has proved to be a long and full life which began before the jet age saw in the space age and in this second Elizabethan age we have seen the advent of computing the internet and the nuclear age. It has been a reign of radical transformation.Above all her reign has seen 16 New Zealand Prime Ministers serve from Sidney Holland to our current Prime Minister and she will no doubt see the swearing-in of the 17th Prime Minister in 2017. This is perhaps the greatest thing about constitutional monarchy—that politicians and Prime Ministers come and go but our monarch and monarchy are enduring. She offers us all lessons in commitment stickability service and dignity. We are proud to honour our Queen today and as a party we proudly say—in defiance of those who would seek to remove the Union Jack from our flag as a first step towards republicanism—God save the Queen.
Clendon David: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British MonarchText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClendon David: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British Monarch[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID CLENDON (Green): It is my pleasure to speak on behalf of the Greens in recognising this remarkable milestone and to join with other parties in offering our congratulations and our good wishes. For over 63 years the monarchy has remained unchanged. It is one of the very few points of stability in an otherwise very fast-changing world. One could write a very long and learned dissertation on the changes in the world in the last 63 years—Hon Simon Bridges: Do it.DAVID CLENDON: —and no doubt somebody will. For the moment I will constrain myself to commenting on just two matters two indicators of change over that time.One of those would be that a few hours ago in this House we passed a Treaty bill—one in a series of Treaty bills. With all of the settlement bills the text contains an acknowledgment and a very profound apology from the Crown for wrongs done to Māori in the past and for the ongoing ill effects of those misdeeds of the Crown and the Governments. I think that such an apology would have been inconceivable 63 years ago. I think we now recognise the importance of the Crown apology as a significant part of settling the disputes that do continue to linger in New Zealand and no doubt will for some wee while yet.The other matter I will reflect on is the identity of our Governors-General over recent decades. Initially and for many years in fact they were typically a long line of British soldiers. In 1967 we saw our first New Zealand - born Governor-General who was a military person a doctor and an athlete. In 1985 we had our first Governor-General of Māori descent representing the Queen in New Zealand. In 1990 there was a significant breakthrough. A woman took up that role of Governor-General the Queen’s representative in New Zealand. In 2006 we had as Governor-General a New Zealand - born man but of Indo-Fijian descent. And I think of course now of the incumbent Governor-General—again somebody who proudly proclaims Māori heritage.I think these differences do indicate that although we have had stability and continuity we have also had change and I think it is incumbent on all of us to seek to find the right balance between stability and change in our work in this House. So enough from me. Again I simply reiterate our congratulations and our good wishes. Kia ora.
English Bill: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British MonarchText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeEnglish Bill: Motions — Queen Elizabeth II—Longest-reigning British Monarch[Sitting date: 09 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon BILL ENGLISH (Acting Prime Minister): I move that this House congratulate Her Majesty the Queen on the occasion of her becoming the—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member just needs to seek leave to move the motion.Hon BILL ENGLISH: I seek leave to move a motion without notice that the House congratulate Her Majesty the Queen on the occasion of her becoming the longest-reigning British monarch.Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.Hon BILL ENGLISH: I move That this House congratulate Her Majesty the Queen on the occasion of her becoming the longest-reigning British monarch. On 9 September 2015 Queen Elizabeth II became the longest-reigning monarch in British history. Previously Queen Victoria held that record reigning for 23226 days—63 years and 7 months. Queen Elizabeth surpasses that record today. This is a significant moment for the Sovereign personally and for Britain and the other 15 nations of the realm.However I would like to note that Her Majesty has already achieved the status of longest-reigning monarch of New Zealand. Queen Victoria’s reign over New Zealand began in 1840 later than her reign in Britain which began in 1837. Queen Elizabeth surpassed her record as the longest-reigning monarch of New Zealand in 2012 the year of extended celebrations of the Queen’s diamond jubilee. When the Prince of Wales was here as part of the jubilee he noted the fact that it was also the occasion of the Queen becoming New Zealand’s longest-reigning monarch.To reign is also to serve and the Queen is widely respected by monarchists and republicans alike as embodying a lifetime of service. She was only 25 years old when she ascended to the throne and became Queen of New Zealand. In her speech then she promised to follow the example of service and devotion provided by her father King George VI. She has certainly fulfilled that promise. Throughout more than six decades of extreme change she has steadfastly served the people of her realm. I have had the honour of meeting Her Majesty on a number of occasions and I know that she has a deep knowledge and interest in the history and affairs of New Zealand and cares sincerely for the welfare of this nation.The Queen has asked for there to be no particular celebrations of this occasion and for it to be treated reverently out of respect for the memory of Queen Victoria and the other monarchs who have gone before. It is a normal working day for the Queen another day in her lifetime of duty and service. So I will keep these comments brief and merely conclude by offering congratulations to the Queen both as Queen of New Zealand and as the longest-reigning British Monarch.
Roy Eric: Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Third Readings[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6433. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call Adrian Rurawhe—a 5-minute call.
Hayes Joanne: Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Third Readings[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6428. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National):Ā tēnā koe e te Mana Whakawā e koro mā e kui mā e rau rangatira mā o Te Hiku o Te Ika ā Māui nau mai haere mai ki te Whare Pāremata i tēnei rā whakahirahira tēnā koutou.[Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker and so welcome to you the elder men and womenfolk and esteemed ones of Northland; come hither to Parliament House on this great day; well done.]Today signals the end of a long process for ngā whanau me ngā hapū o Ngāti Kuri Te Aupōuri NgāiTakoto Te Rarawa. It is a significant day today for all of you and I am proud to stand here and speak in this final part of your claims settlement process. From the time the lands were confiscated in the 1800s to today the journey that you have all made has been one of significant achievement and I pay tribute to you all.As I said I am humbled—I am humbled to participate in the third reading of this legislation arising from Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill. Today one journey ends and another begins for Te Hiku o Te Ika: the journey to economic independence; the journey to reclaiming decision-making powers over forestry farms and conservation lands and over beaches and mountains. Lands that once belonged to Te Hiku today are returned in varying measures from its northernmost point at Te Rerenga Wairua also known to most New Zealanders as Cape Reinga to the shores of Te Oneroa-a-Tōhe or Ninety Mile Beach. These are the places that for many of us have been holiday destinations without our regarding for their significance to the iwi of Te Hiku but that changes today. That changes today and the people of New Zealand will hear it and they will hear it shouted from the highest mountaintops from this House and from all of you.I want to extend my thanks to the negotiators for the iwi and the Crown. I want to thank the staff of the Office of Treaty Settlements and I want to thank the Parliamentary Counsel Office and members of the Māori Affairs Committee as well as our Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for his diligence and his hard work. But mostly I want to thank Te Hiku o Te Ika-a-Māui for their perseverance their ihi wehi and their kaha [personal magnetism awe and intensity]throughout this whole process.I will finish my kōrero with a whakataukī from one of your ancestresses Meri Ngāroto. “He aha te mea nui o tēnei ao? He tangata he tangata he tangata.”—What is the most important thing in the world? It is people it is people it is people. And this bill is for the people of the past the people of the present and the people of the future of Te Hiku o Te Ika. Kia ora.
Borrows Chester: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6407. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): No that is not a point of order and the leave will not be put.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 113 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Parts 1 to 15 schedules 1 to 22 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.The Committee divided the bill into the Ngāti Kuri Claims Settlement Bill the Te Aupouri Claims Settlement Bill the NgāiTakoto Claims Settlement Bill Te Rarawa Claims Settlement Bill the Ngāti Kahu Accumulated Rentals Trust Bill and the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act 1977 Amendment Bill pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper114.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.
Peters Winston: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6407. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): Well it probably comes from the Minister himself but he has not read it.
Borrows Chester: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6407. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): What is the source of the debate pack?
Peters Winston: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6407. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek to table the debate pack which the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations clearly has not read which refers to the 2015 decision at the High Court in Wellington.
Finlayson Christopher: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFinlayson Christopher: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6407. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations): And some of us have read the legislation and the deed a darned sight more carefully than the Rt Hon Winston Peters. Let me repeat again for the right honourable member in words that are simple and clear: the occupiers have no right to interfere with members of the local community carrying out lawful activities. Occupation is not the way to address these issues. As I said in my first contribution both Ngāti Kahu and NgāiTakoto have interests in the airport. I refer—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I don’t agree.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: Well the member may not agree but I suggest that he read the 2013 remedies report. It may be instructive for him. Kaitāia Airport is already—read the lips—available to Ngāti Kahu through the Treaty settlement process as a deferred selection property. It is available at 50 percent because of the conjoint interests. That is the point that the member steadfastly refuses to acknowledge or inquire as to the correctness of the position.So before getting on his high horse in this Chamber and giving one of his contributions which are always very impressive although utterly devoid of fact can I suggest that he read the deed of settlement read the 2013 remedies report and then speak from the basis of someone who is properly instructed on the facts—a novelty but a very worthwhile occupation.
Davis Kelvin: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDavis Kelvin: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6405. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau): My contribution in the Committee stage will be brief because to be frank Ngāti Kuri Te Aupōuri NgāiTakoto and Te Rarawa have waited long enough. But I do want to thank the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for just spelling out Supplementary Order Paper 114 and explaining how the bill is going to be split up into its component parts to reflect the needs of each of the iwi.I would also like to thank him for the explanation regarding the situation at Kaitāia Airportas well. Ngāti Kahu and NgāiTakoto have a 50:50 interest in it. If after December 2018 Ngāti Kahu have decided not to go further NgāiTakoto will have the opportunity to purchase the airport on their own and I understand the reasoning. Why should one iwi’s progress be held up because another iwi has decided not to engage? So I thank the Minister for that explanation.I would also just like if the Committee could indulge me for a second to express my concern around the occupation at the airport and it is to do with the opportunity for medical flights to get into the airport. I believe that as of today there are some 60 people whose health issues could be jeopardised by the doctors and specialists not being able to fly in and out and those 60-odd people are all the whanaunga of the people who are agitating at the airport. I am told that there are children waiting for operations. I am told that there are people with mental health issues who are waiting for psychiatrists to come up. If those people do not get the treatment they need who knows what may happen to them? As the person I spoke to on the phone earlier this morning said if they go off and cause problems in the community then it just causes more troubles.So I would like to think that the protesters have the right to protest. I think that they have made their point but for the good and the health and well-being of the people of Kaitāia—all of their whanaunga—I think that they should stand down from their protest. I believe that if someone has a heart attack and the hospital cannot deal with it and they need to be air-evacuated out the hospital does not call in a helicopter for that; they actually fly in a plane. The airline is concerned about flying its pilots and its staff into a situation that may turn volatile. We do not know what people may do that might endanger the flights. So as I say I would like to think that the protesters have made their point. They should now stand down for the well-being of the people of Kaitāia.But as I say I am not going to drag this out any longer. Ngāti Kuri Te Aupōuri NgāiTakoto and Te Rarawa have waited long enough for this day. Kia ora.
Borrows Chester: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6404. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Members—well that is for me to ask. Members leave is put for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
Macindoe Tim: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6404. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (Senior Whip—National): If it is possible we would take each as one but I am happy to be guided. I have discussed this with fellow whips. Are fellow whips happy for it to be taken as one vote as well?
Borrows Chester: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6404. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Can you clarify that the votes will be as one question as well as the debate as one or do you want the votes individually? It would be 15 calls.
Macindoe Tim: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6404. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (Senior Whip—National): I seek leave for the Committee to consider all parts of Te Hiku Claims Settlement Bill as one debate with the voting to be taken separately for each part.
Macindoe Tim: Te Kawerau ā Maki Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Te Kawerau ā Maki Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6403. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): Kia ora e te Mana Whakawā. Kia ora e te Whare. Tēnā koutou e te iwi. I am going to take a very short call but I want to just say that it is on occasions such as this when I feel that not only do we see Parliament at its best but in fact we as members are deeply humbled by what we are doing today. I am always moved by these occasions and I learn a great deal. I want as others have done to acknowledge the great generosity of the iwi in bringing us to this point and the admirable resolve of the Minister and the work that he and his team have done. As somebody who grew up in Auckland and who loves the Waitakere Ranges I am interested in noting many of the comments that have been made today. I simply want to say that it is a wonderful day when we can reach this point given the history that has led us to this point. I again thank the iwi for the generosity. It is wonderful to see so many of you here today and I warmly commend this bill to the House.Bill read a third time.Waiata
Foster-Bell Paul: Te Kawerau ā Maki Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Te Kawerau ā Maki Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6400. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National):Tēnā koe e te Mana Whakawā tēnā koutou katoa e ngā mema o te Whare Pāremata o Aotearoa.[Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. To all of you members of the House of Parliament of New Zealand I acknowledge you.]I rise to take a brief call on Te Kawerau ā Maki Claims Settlement Bill because the members who have spoken before me have covered the key elements such as the financial redress of $6.5 million the restoration of lands and the contribution being made—the grant of $300000—towards the establishment of a marae. But it is apposite to observe on this day when we are celebrating and commemorating Her Majesty the Queen of New Zealand achieving the longest reign in the history of any of her realms that this bill does more than simply restore mana to those who were mistreated through the actions of the Crown. It also helps to restore honour to that Crown which committed those acts that led to the deprivation of rightful property and also to the loss of mana in the past by this iwi. So I would like to congratulate the Minister the Hon Chris Finlayson on his efforts in this regard and also the rangatira of the iwi who have engaged fruitfully and have come to a settlement that does set the iwi up to go forward with hopefully I think a sense of optimism. I commend this bill to the House.
Mahuta Nanaia: Te Kawerau ā Maki Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMahuta Nanaia: Te Kawerau ā Maki Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6382. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato): Thank you for that clarification Minister Finlayson. It certainly reaffirms some of the discussions in the Māori Affairs Committee and we too are grateful for the constructive outcome regarding access provisions on the Te Hēnga site.Minister I foreshadowed in the last part of the debate that it would be my intention to question you further regarding the first rights provisions in so far as they relate to the Tāmaki Collective. Given the recent announcements and the clarifications that you yourself have given to assure those interests covered by the Tāmaki Collective in so far as the first rights of refusal provisions apply I think that is a helpful clarification that will support and advance the intentions of the provisions in this Te Kawerau ā Maki claim. I am certainly mindful that the interests of Te Kawerau ā Maki within the Auckland isthmus need to be assured and when I saw that particular statement I felt that although it was primarily directed for clarification to Ngāti Whātua it does apply equally to all the iwi under the Tāmaki Collective settlement. So I thank you for that.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 112 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to Part 1 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Part 1 as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 112 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to Part 2 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Part 2 as amended agreed to.Part 3 agreed to.Schedule 1 agreed to.Schedule 2 agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 112 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to schedule 3 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Schedule 3 as amended agreed to.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.