edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Chen NaisiNAISI CHEN (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. This is one of the bills when I was reading it this morning that—you know lots and lots of titles came up in my head—Hon Member: This morning?NAISI CHEN: —in terms of why are we doing something like this that is so important? Why are we only doing it now when there's been such a problem for such a long time? One of those titles that came up in my head this morning—and this is probably my third time reading it actually to the member on the other side because this bill has come up. As I was refreshing my memories on this bill one of the titles that came up was Labour Party not afraid to get into the details"—Labour Party not afraid to plug a gap in the legislation.The other side may laugh at this but their mistakes or the hesitancy of the previous Government not actually legislating this bill meant that the taxpayer has lost out. The taxpayer has lost out so much money at the Tūī oilfield. This bill is not just something that we've imagined that officials have dreamt up. No this bill is based on a real story. Taxpayers have already had to fork out $155 million to make sure that we decommission this field properly.Another title that came out is that the Labour Party is ambitious in our environmental initiatives but at the same time we make sure that the economy gets looked after. We know how important the energy sector is how important sustainable energy is to our nation and this is one of the steps that we will take to make sure that we look after the environment that these oilfields get decommissioned properly with regard to the environment that they're part of and at the same time that we still get the energy that we need from the ground.Another title that just came to my mind this morning as I was reading is actually a quote from the Hon Michael Wood. The Hon Michael Wood likes to say—and I think he said in this House plenty of times—that the market has failed; it's time for the Government to step in. This bill is another example of where the market has failed and the Government needs to step in. So this is once again one of those bills that we've had to make sure that those users who have made money from our land made money from our environment and have obviously served our economy—they have made a profit and they should also be responsible for cleaning up after themselves.As the deputy chair of the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee we really look forward to hearing all of the submissions in coming months. The energy sector hasn't been a sector that is a stranger to us. They have come to us on many occasions and engaged with us very constructively in the past on many bills before this House. On that note I commend this bill to the House."
Sio Aupito WilliamInstruction to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade CommitteeHon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO (Minister for Courts) on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs: I move That the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee report the Maritime Powers Bill to the House by 11 November 2021.
Eagle PaulPAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to be speaking in the final slot for the Maritime Powers Bill. Look I want to acknowledge the work of those in law enforcement agencies who have really been clamouring for something like this to take place for some time now. I know that the Government has a maritime security strategy which underscores the importance of such a robust authorising mechanism to deliver the appropriate security for our coastlines.I want to just acknowledge too that representing a seat in New Zealand that has a coastline and two islands I am aware constantly of what might be out there so to speak. But what I do know is in terms of protecting our taonga people—and the fact that this party which turns 105 tomorrow has a proud tradition of independent foreign policy. So therefore I commend this bill to the House.
Lubeck MarjaMARJA LUBECK (Labour): A pleasure to follow that elegant contribution from the previous speaker Chris Penk. I rise alongside members on both sides of the House obviously who are supporting this Maritime Powers Bill. It's easy to support it because of course this bill is aimed at preventing serious criminal offending at sea. As we heard from the Hon Aupito Sio when he kicked off this debate with his first reading speech that's an important aspect of our national security because increased criminal activities have the potential to threaten our community's wellbeing. We heard from my colleague Ingrid Leary about the dangers of methamphetamine coming in through our coastal borders. Human trafficking has been touched on already and I know that two more of the talented class of 2020 will be speaking on this no doubt: Vanushi Walters and Ibrahim Omer. I'm looking forward to hearing your contribution on human trafficking.Now this bill allows New Zealand to respond to criminal activities in the oceans and seas beyond New Zealand's territory. One of the previous speakers has mentioned already our 15000 kilometres of coastline and our being one of the largest exclusive economic zones in the world and so it is really important that we do everything to protect that particular domain. It's a complex security environment; so it's important that New Zealand is able to respond to these criminal activities that threaten our security. Whether that is about smuggling methamphetamine or other illicit drugs arms humans or in fact wildlife including our taonga native reptiles it's important that we do everything we can to make sure that we protect against that happening.The previous speaker mentioned some particular words in this bill when it comes to reasonable grounds to believe which as he rightly pointed out seems a reasonable thing to have. So that is the threshold that an offence has to reach for evidence on board a ship in international waters. Our Labour Party manifesto points out that New Zealand has a proud tradition of an independent foreign policy with focus on promoting multilateralism human rights and the international rule of law. What this bill does is build further on that principle and I commend it to the House. Thank you.
Dean JacquiCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The committee has considered the Education and Training (Grants—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill and reports it without amendment. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
Goldsmith Paul; Hipkins ChrisHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Well just on the commencement the obvious point to make given the fact that this piece of legislation has been rushed into the House without proper time for submissions to be made and considered—I would suggest that we would be better to give the sector longer to prepare for this and to carry on the conversation. I wondered whether Minister Hipkins had given any thought to a slight postponement of the commencement date in recognition of the very poor process through which this piece of legislation was introduced.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Thank you Madam Chair. I can indicate that no the Government doesn't intend to delay the commencement of this. This particular provision does not implement pay parity. It does not specify what funding will be available. It does not specify the conditions that would be placed on that funding. It simply allows those discussions to happen and then those rules to be put in place.
Dean JacquiClauses 1 to 3CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): We come now to clauses 1 to 3 the debates on the title commencement and principal Act.
Willis NicolaNICOLA WILLIS (National): My apologies Madam Chair. I did want to take a call on Part 2 because the Minister made a comment in relation to Part 1 that has a consequential result in Part 2 which was that he said that the employment relations aims referred to in Part 1 would be pay parity. So my question is: did he consider inserting into Part 2 or elsewhere in the bill some sort of a definition of pay parity" or a clarification that the employment relations aims that he sought were narrowed down to that and did he consider advice about whether or not that should be narrowed in this part of the bill or elsewhere in order to be crystal clear that this was not to be a vehicle for the Minister to be able to implement his broader employment relations aims as they may apply to union membership or as they may apply to other goals that he or any future Minister may have and may be able to use this bill as a vehicle to achieve? Part 2 agreed to."
Dean JacquiPart 2 Transitional savings and related provisionsCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members we now come to Part 2. Part 2 is the debate on clause 5 and the Schedule—Transitional savings and related provisions". The question is that Part 2 stand part. Is the member going to take a call?"
Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): I struggle to understand why Minister Hipkins says in the debate that we've just had about this bill where he assured the House that his intentions were good and it's not the Government's intention to do X Y and Z—and I've asked him Well why should the sector trust him when he makes that statement?" I fail to understand how he then says it doesn't relate to the bill—but anyway that's how he operates. The second question I have is when we talk about employment relations aims—so the new subsections 5B and 5C apply to conditions or purposes: "Those conditions or purposes may be specified by the Minister to help achieve aims that are or include employment relations aims." I'd just like to list some potential employment relations aims that he would have in mind because when I think of this Labour Government and their employment relations aims I think higher union penetration might be an employment relations aim for this Government. That would probably be the number one employment relations aim that they have. I presume—well I can't presume whether or not that is indeed his aim or not. So I'd like to know what he has in mind there and why he needed that particular clause in this piece of legislation."
Hipkins ChrisHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): In terms of the contribution that the Hon Paul Goldsmith made none of the matters that he raised in his contribution relate to the bill. In terms of the issues that Nicola Willis just raised around what employment relations aims would the Government use here the employment relations aim is quite a simple one: it is pay parity.
Willis NicolaNICOLA WILLIS (National): I'll give Minister Hipkins an opportunity to reflect on my colleague's contribution because I think that the Hon Paul Goldsmith really got to the nub of things which is that there is concern that a condition like this in the bill gives significant power to the Minister that may not be matched with the funding through the Budget process that would allow these conditions to be set in a way that's perceived as fair. But my question is a separate one which is about this phrase employment relations aims." It is a technical point but I think it's important because what I am trying to understand is why we wouldn't just leave it at "Subsections (5B) and (5C) apply to conditions or purposes—(b) that relate to employment matters (for example remuneration)." Why is it that we're clarifying that the Minister may be trying to achieve employment relations aims? I would put to the Minister and to this committee that if we are trying to achieve employment relations aims generally the place that that's done is in an employment relations Act and it is done between an employer and their employee. It is not something one would expect to see in the Education Act which is about educating people. So why are employment relations aims in here when it would seem that for the technical point that the Minister is trying to achieve simply clarifying it down to remuneration would be sufficient?"
Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): I just want to tease out Minister Hipkins' comments about—I mean the issue here is the uncertainty that the sector faces around a piece of legislation that we're talking about here which appears to be broader than what is required and talks about applying conditions and purposes to employment matters and employment relations aims and the Minister seems to be saying Don't worry. Trust us. It's not the Government's intention to go further. We're just going to do what we say which is just focusing on pay parity."So the obvious question is: why should the sector trust this Government on this score when there is every reason to suppose that there is a broader agenda which is hostile frankly to private sector involvement in education full stop and hostile to private sector involvement in education in early childhood education and when this is the same Government that's made all sorts of commitments recently? The latest one just as an example is that there won't be any new taxes other than the higher income tax rate that has been introduced this year and yet of course there are tens of thousands of potential ute owners who will be paying higher taxes.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order!Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: No I'm using that by way of example to say this is a Government that wants people to trust them when they say it's not the Government's intention to meddle further than pay and conditions and I'm wondering where the Minister gets his confidence that people will trust him.Secondly particularly given the fact that this legislation creates a deal whereby a provider opts in for the extra resources but doesn't yet have a clear idea of how much it's going to cost the operator long term—and there's all sorts of uncertainty around that and what it means if a pay parity scale was to be imposed on operations. That could have very significant impacts on the pay structure. Where individual people start on the pay scale is an area of uncertainty and it is an intrusion into the management and performance management of the firm. So it's an intrusion in terms of the management style but it's secondly a great uncertainty around the cost structure.So I guess the question I have for the Minister is: is he not surprised that there is a degree of uncertainty in the sector as a result of this piece of legislation and how will he reassure the sector that his intentions are narrow beyond just a bald statement that that is indeed the case given the history that we've seen from this Government?"
Tuiono Teanau; Hipkins ChrisTEANAU TUIONO (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you for that clarity Minister Hipkins. It kind of crystallised a whole lot of the questions that I had. My question is around certainty. I mean we support this bill. It is a small technical bill and it helps to achieve a whole bunch of things and we know that the early childhood education sector has been waiting for pay parity for some time. We know that the differential in pay levels between those in kindergarten and those in non-kindergarten places can be huge and that helps to exacerbate the teacher-workload issues and ratios and all of those things as well. But I was wondering around the issue of certainty in terms of trying to get to full pay parity certainty around what you think you will be doing in the next Budget and the Budget after that—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! The member won't bring the Chairperson into the debate.TEANAU TUIONO: Oh sorry. Yeah so the question is around certainty and the sorts of anxieties that are being expressed from the sector but also from the teachers as well. So I wanted to see what the thoughts were around responses to the sector and providers in general but also responses to the teaching sector as well within this Budget cycle the next Budget cycle and the cycle after that—moving hopefully to fuller pay parity.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): In answer to the member's question the Government has set out to the sector that we intend to implement pay parity in a stepped way and that is through instalments if you like. This year's Budget provided funding for the second instalment. Last year's Budget lifted the minimum rates of pay out to the equivalent of the kindergarten teachers' collective agreement or the kindergarten teachers' pay scale; this year's Budget maintains that minimum rate of pay—so created a smaller increment to keep up with the increase in kindergarten teachers' pay and started to step further up the pay scale up to step six on the pay scale; it is about a 10-step scale.The commitment that we've given to the sector is that over time we will continue to step up so we will continue to add extra steps. But I also was able to clarify for the sector in the weekend that opting in to this particular block does not commit a service to opt in to future increases if they don't wish to—they won't have to opt out and go all the way back down to the bottom if they don't want to opt in to the next increments for example.
Dean Jacqui; Salesa JennyASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Education and Training (Grants—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill.EDUCATION AND TRAINING (GRANTS—BUDGET MEASURES) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteePart 1 Funding of certain early childhood services and certified playgroupsCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members the House is in committee on the Education and Training (Grants—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill. This is the debate on clause 4—Part 1 is Funding of certain early childhood services and certified playgroups". The question is that Part 1 stand part."
Sage Eugenie; Dean JacquiHon EUGENIE SAGE (Green): Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. The Green Party is very pleased to support both of these COVID-19 orders and we thank the Minister for his kind comments about the diligence of the Regulations Review Committee because it is under the House's Standing Orders that the Regulations Review Committee must examine all regulations including legislative instruments and disallowable instruments that are not legislative instruments. The committee does that in a very careful way and is greatly assisted by the work of the committee secretariat and also legislative counsel. And as the Minister noted when the Regulations Review Committee has made recommendations about the change perhaps in the language of orders to ensure that the powers in them are clearly expressed and don't unduly burden or trespass on individuals' rights those changes have generally been accepted. The committee went and examined both these orders the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Air Border) Order (No 2) Amendment Order (No 4) 2021 and the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Required Testing) Amendment Order (No 2) 2021 and did not have any concerns to report to the House. And the Minister has highlighted what the purpose of both these orders is.While others in this House may be critical about the roll-out of saliva testing I would really like to emphasise the Green Party's thanks to everyone working in quarantine facilities everyone working at the border all of our health workers that the second order applies to in ensuring that they need to undergo testing that the work that they have done ensures that we are able to be here today under alert level 1 because of their precautionary approach and their attention to protection at the borders. These two orders while they may be relatively minor in terms of their impacts have been closely examined and the Regulations Review Committee will continue to do that. It has to do that within 12 working days after the orders are presented to the House and we will continue to do that. Thank you.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that the motion be agreed to.
Ngāti Maru (Taranaki) Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading
Roberts AngelaANGELA ROBERTS (Labour): Tēnā koutou tēnā koutou Ngāti Maru tēnā koutou katoa. It is a very humbling experience to stand here as a member of this House and as a neighbour of your amazing amazing bit of the country. I want to just follow on from what Debbie Ngarewa-Packer the previous speaker quite rightly pointed out to the nation in pointing out your generosity. I want to thank you for not giving up. I want to thank you for my baby to whakapapa to the Waitara River and for fighting to have an influence over the care of that river. It is so important to so many of us. I want to thank you for having enough ambition to get you here today and for the opportunities that are being opened up for our whole country because of what you have done. The tears of your generations that have filled the rivers will actually do so much for our future generations. It was wonderful to talk to Anaru Marshall this morning about the latest conversation with Te Kahui o apo Taranaki Maru and helping our schools around central Taranaki to really rise to the challenges that quite rightly are put in front of them to make sure that your children are served in the best way possible. I thank you for persevering. I thank you for showing such leadership with the East Taranaki Environmental Trust—Pūrangi—and the work you've done for our kōkako and our kiwi and the leadership in helping other landowners and people who care to do the right thing. So for that I thank you. I thank you for stepping up and making sure that our opportunities for our young people—to be ambitious and say that actually training our kids is not just in how to cut down a tree but how to look after each other while we do it and how to be not just good at forestry but good employers and good forestry managers. All of that comes from Te Ao Māori and that means our young people are going to be helping our country to be a better place. For that I thank you. For those of you who don't know we've had a lot of descriptions about the boundaries of your rohe. For those who don't know it is a spectacular piece of countryside: the hills and the beautiful little valleys the water and great places to grow kānuka apparently. I'm just really grateful that you have quite rightly been restored as those who should be looking after it nurturing it and making sure it reaches its potential for your people as it quite rightly should have been for the generations that it hasn't. So kia kaha good luck and I'm just really humbled to be in your presence. Thank you for all you have done and I just wish you all the best for all that you will achieve in the future.
Court SimonSIMON COURT (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. Firstly I wish to acknowledge Ngāti Maru iwi—nau mai haere mai—and Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Maru Taranaki trustees—nau mai haere mai. ACT supports this bill. We believe that it is important that the Crown acknowledge its failings—its acts and omissions—and the bill goes a long way towards setting out very clearly what were those acts and omissions and how they're to be addressed. ACT supports this bill because this is the type of legislation that reinforces the value and importance of private property rights to people's health and wellbeing—their long-term health and wellbeing—which is associated with their relationship with the land. The Treaty of Waitangi offered all New Zealanders to be equal before the law and to have the same rights and privileges and obligations as citizens of Aotearoa New Zealand and we hope that this bill goes a long way towards addressing those rights which were trampled on. Now while the Treaty claims process proposes to address all historical acts and omissions it's clear that an Act of Parliament—a law—will not be sufficient to heal those wounds and to address all of those emotions that come with loss of land. That takes time—it takes a long long long time. When I look at the commercial redress offered to Ngāti Maru it says that an exclusive right of refusal is granted over specific Crown-owned properties within the Ngāti Maru rohe for 179 years from the date of this settlement. That indicates the amount of time it might take to restore the economic sovereignty due to the failure of the Crown to protect the property rights and the human rights of Ngāti Maru. That's why ACT supports this settlement bill. We support it to select committee and we hope that those who wish to make submissions if they believe there are still improvements to be made to the bill will come forward and make those submissions. To those who are concerned about how these types of settlements might erode the rights of other people when I was looking through the bill this afternoon there are specific clauses that state quite clearly that this bill does not affect the rights of others. This is a bill that specifically addresses the historical injustice the loss of land and the other acts and omissions by the Crown. For that reason the ACT Party supports this bill and we look forward to seeing it come to select committee. Thank you very much Madam Speaker.
Mallard Trevor; Bishop ChrisQuestion No. 11 to MinisterSPEAKER: I call on Government Order of the Day No. 1.CHRIS BISHOP (National): Point of order. In relation to question No. 11 from me to the Minister for COVID-19 Response today the language I used in my primary question is exactly the same language as the Minister used in his answer to the primary question on the same topic last week. So he specifically said last week I can't give you the percentage"—SPEAKER: Order! Order! What I want now is very quickly a remedy that the member wants through this intervention because the member has interrupted now another debate and we're not meant to go back arguing on a particular point when it was made very clear by me that the question that was asked was different; the fact that it related to an answer is actually not relevant. The member asked a different question—CHRIS BISHOP: No it's not different.SPEAKER: —and I am not prepared to entertain further discussion on this now.CHRIS BISHOP: Well what is the remedy to make the Minister who has the data come to the House and answer the question?SPEAKER: Ask the same question as he did last time."
Mallard TrevorPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: A petition has been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. CLERK: Petition of Alexander Woods requesting that the House urge the Government to better protect Crown land by improving the prevention and detection of the dumping of clean fill and rubbish into and onto Crown land.SPEAKER: That petition stands referred to the Petitions Committee. Ministers have delivered papers.CLERK: Electricity Authority:Statement of Intent 1 July 2021 - 30 June 2025Statement of Performance Expectations 1 July 2021 - 30 June 2022Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority:Statement of Intent 1 July 2021 - 30 June 2025Statement of Performance Expectations 1 July 2021 - 30 June 2022Ministry for the Environment Natural and Built Environments Bill Parliamentary Paper on the Exposure draft updatedTourism New Zealand:Statement of Intent 2021-2025Statement of Performance Expectations 2021-2022AgResearch Statement of Corporate Intent 1 July 2021 - 30 June 2026GNS Science Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Limited Statement of Corporate Intent 1 July 2021 - 30 June 2026NIWA Statement of Corporate Intent 1 July 2021 - 30 June 2026Te Māngai Pāho Statement of Performance Expectations 2021-2022Orillion Animal Control Products Limited Statement of Corporate Intent 2022-2024.SPEAKER: Those papers are published under the authority of the House.Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK:Report of the Environment Committee on the Crown Pastoral Land Reform Billreports of the Finance and Expenditure Committee:2021/22 Estimates for Vote Audit2021/22 Estimates for Vote Pike River Re-entrythe petition of Shane Lustthe Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Central government: Result of the 2019/20 auditsreports of the Health Committee:the petition of Sarah Macraethe petition of Sarah Teare. SPEAKER: The bill is set down for second reading. The report of the Controller and Auditor-General's report is set down for consideration.The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of a bill.CLERK: Annual Reporting and Audit Time Frames Extensions Legislation Bill introduction.SPEAKER: That bill is set down for first reading.
Rurawhe AdrianTUESDAY 6 JULY 2021The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSDEPUTY SPEAKER: E te Atua kaha rawa ka tuku whakamoemiti atu mātou mō ngā karakia kua waihotia mai ki runga i a mātou. Ka waiho i ō mātou pānga whaiaro katoa ki te taha. Ka mihi mātou ki te Kuīni me te inoi atu mō te ārahitanga i roto i ō mātou whakaaroarohanga kia mōhio ai kia whakaiti ai tā mātou whakahaere i ngā take o te Whare nei mō te oranga te maungārongo me te aroha o Aotearoa. Amene.[Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the Queen and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom and humility for the welfare peace and compassion of New Zealand. Amen.]
Petitions Papers Select Committee Reports and Introduction of BillsDocument for deletingA document for getting rid of other documents by having its document id replaced with that of the document to be deleted. Then the date role=removed" field takes over to ensure the document is retired.Content:some content"
Thursday 1 July 2021 - Volume 753
Family Court (Supporting Children in Court) Legislation Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Family Court (Supporting Children in Court) Legislation Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 40New Zealand National 30; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.The House adjourned at 4.58 p.m.
Education and Training (Grants—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Education and Training (Grants—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the following sessional order be adopted: A leader of Te Paati Māori is entitled to one 20-minute call in the Budget debate one 20-minute call in the debate on the Prime Minister's statement and a five-minute call on any ministerial statement and Standing Order 365 and Appendix A are to be applied accordingly.Ayes 110New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.
1. Question No. 1—Rights for Victims of Insane Offenders BillCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi) to the Member in charge of the Rights for Victims of Insane Offenders BillQUESTIONS TO MEMBERSQuestion No. 1—Rights for Victims of Insane Offenders Bill1. CHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi) to the Member in charge of the Rights for Victims of Insane Offenders Bill: What reports or reaction has she received recently in relation to the Rights for Victims of Insane Offenders Bill?Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Member in charge of the Rights for Victims of Insane Offenders Bill): Thank you Mr Speaker. I have received feedback that it is callous and cruel for Labour to delay this bill when the current verdict is—SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will resume her seat.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order.SPEAKER: Well are you going to let me rule first? Parliament took a decision yesterday and the member has to make it absolutely clear—I'm making it absolutely clear to the member that she does not have responsibility for Parliament's decision. She can only answer on questions for which she is responsible.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. The question was: what feedback had she received? If the feedback that the member has received includes criticism of a particular party for their perception of a block then how is that out of order? We've had plenty of references to political parties in question time today.SPEAKER: Well sure—sure. As was referred to I think earlier today or possibly yesterday in question time having patsy questions which invite people in charge of bills to slag the Opposition is out of order.Chris Bishop: Point of order.SPEAKER: A point of order—I hope the member's not going to reflect on the ruling I've just made.Chris Bishop: Well no.SPEAKER: Well he better not be.Chris Bishop: Well no it's a fresh point of order. Is the position now that you can receive feedback from members of the public and reflect on members of our side of the House who aren't even here and call them inane"—to quote you earlier—but members are not allowed to answer questions about feedback they've had in relation to other political parties?SPEAKER: Right right I suggest one of the early things that the member should do is get a hearing or comprehension test as to my comments and then he might want to come back.Chris Bishop: Point of order. Point of order Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: No I'm not going to continue with this. Does Chris Penk want a supplementary or not?Chris Penk: What are the member's hopes for the next steps for the Rights for Victims of Insane Offenders Bill?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: Thank you Mr Speaker. That this bill will not be delayed further because the current verdict is insensitive and deeply upsetting to the needs and feelings of those who have lost a loved one adding further pain to people who are already significantly traumatised. Thanks Labour."
9. Question No. 9—HealthSARAH PALLETT (Labour—Ilam) to the Associate Minister of HealthQuestion No. 9—Health9. SARAH PALLETT (Labour—Ilam) to the Associate Minister of Health: What announcements has she made about community maternity services?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Associate Minister of Health): Yesterday I announced changes to the way community midwives are paid to better reflect the challenges they face providing care and support to mothers and whānau. Community midwives are paid through what is known as a primary maternity services notice. The previous notice was introduced in 2007. It was out of date and provided no compensation for the additional time and travel required of some maternity care providers. This created an unsustainable business model for maternity in rural and highly deprived communities and barriers to access. The new notice is more flexible and will provide greater funding to midwives working in more remote parts of New Zealand and when they are supporting mothers and whānau with complex clinical or social needs. Sarah Pallett: How will the new notice better support community midwives and the communities they serve? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Midwives do an incredibly important job and they deserve to be backed up by a strong maternity system that makes it easier for them to do their job. The 2021 notice introduces rural practice travel and additional care payments to more equitably fund travel in provision of maternity care. This will help improve the sustainability of community-based primary maternity services and it has been welcomed by the College of Midwives. Sarah Pallett: What else is being done to strengthen maternity services? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Budget 2020 included the largest ever funding boost for primary maternity services. The Government invested $242 million over four years so maternity service providers mothers and their babies can receive more support. In the last year we've expanded the maternity quality and safety programme in every DHB we have updated national maternity clinical guidance and invested in information technology system improvements and we have put $6 million into Te Ara ō Hine an initiative designed to help attract and retain more Māori and Pasifika midwives into the profession by better supporting students in their studies. There is more work to do to strengthen our maternity services but we are laying the foundations of a better future.
7. Question No. 7—Workplace Relations and SafetyMARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and SafetyQuestion No. 7—Workplace Relations and Safety7. MARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What workplace relations and safety policies come into effect from 1 July?Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): Our Government is delivering on a range of commitments to support working New Zealanders from 1 July. We recognise that we needed to support security guards given that they are on the front lines in keeping our managed isolation facilities secure and doing other important work around our country. That's why I'm pleased to confirm that as of today security guards have been added to Schedule 1 of the Employment Relations Act helping to protect their employment conditions.Marja Lubeck: What effect will this have on the industry?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: With these new protections the 7800 security guards nationwide will be able to keep their jobs and retain their pay rates and conditions when a business is sold or restructured. This will help stop the race to the bottom where companies are undercutting each other and lead to an industry that competes on service quality which helps the companies already offering good conditions.Marja Lubeck: What other changes have started today?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Today also marks one year of paid parental leave being boosted to 26 weeks so it's a good time that the maximum rate for eligible employees and self-employed people will increase to $621.76 this week from $606.46 per week in the previous year. We're also delivering on our commitment to support the welfare of seafarers by putting seafarer welfare centres on to a sustainable funding footing. These changes show that the Government is committed to decent and dignified work for everyone in New Zealand.
3. Question No. 3—TransportSIMON COURT (ACT) to the Minister of TransportQuestion No. 3—Transport3. SIMON COURT (ACT) to the Minister of Transport: What estimates if any has he been provided by officials on the cost of cutting greenhouse gas emissions through the clean car package?Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): I thank the member for his excellent and timely question. The Clean Car Discount scheme alone is expected to prevent up to 9.2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. The expected marginal abatement costs for the Clean Car Discount and Clean Car Standard combined is estimated at minus $160 to minus $200 per tonne of carbon emissions prevented. The estimates are negative meaning that they represent a net benefit to the New Zealand economy due to large fuel savings for New Zealanders. In short the policy will reduce emissions clean up air quality save Kiwis money and reduce our reliance on volatile international fuel supply chains. No doubt the ACT Party opposes it.Simon Court: What additional carbon emissions will be reduced by the clean car package that would not otherwise have been captured under the emissions trading scheme cap?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: When the emissions trading scheme was established by a previous Labour Government it was never envisaged that there would never be any specific measures to support New Zealanders to reduce their emissions. I do note that the analysis that has been provided shows that if we relied solely on the price of carbon to achieve the same kind of electric vehicle level uptakes as we will achieve through the Clean Car Discounts then we would need to increase the price of carbon to approximately $575 per tonne meaning an extra $1.30 per litre on petrol prices. If the member wants to campaign on that policy then he is very welcome to do so.Simon Court: The Minister has quoted a now debunked Ministry of Transport report—SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will ask a question and will not make an assertion. I'll let him start again but this is the last time I'm going to let him do that.Simon Court: So where does the Minister get his figures on the negative cost of carbon from?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: From the regulatory impact statement.Simon Court: So how does that compare with the cost of reducing carbon emissions through the emissions trading scheme?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Well as I just outlined in my previous answer if we relied solely on the emissions trading scheme and the price of carbon to achieve the same uptake of electric vehicles we would have to price carbon at approximately $575 per tonne compared to the current level of approximately $40 per tonne. That would be an extra $1.30 per litre on the price of petrol—that is not this Government's policy.
2. Question No. 2—FinanceARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 2—Finance2. ARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The Government's ongoing support to secure the economic recovery is being reflected in the Crown's financial accounts. The Crown accounts for the 11 months to the end of May 2021 were released today and they show that the operating balance before gains and losses the OBEGAL was a deficit of $3.6 billion. That is $5.8 billion better than was forecast by Treasury in Budget 2021. Net core Crown debt stood at 31.2 percent of GDP $6 billion less than forecast. While the Government's books are in better shape than expected we cannot afford to be complacent. We are still facing elevated levels of debt and OBEGAL deficit for some years to come as a result of the response that was needed to the pandemic.Arena Williams: What is the impact on the economy of the country's tax take?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: New Zealanders' confidence in the recovery has been confirmed via an increase in tax revenue. Tax revenue was $89 billion in the 11 months to the end of May 2021 $4.1 billion above forecast. The improvement was across the board with corporate tax being 13.7 percent higher than expected source deductions revenue up 2 percent on forecast and GST up 2.5 percent. Treasury notes that the positive variances reflect economic conditions being better than forecast. In simple terms businesses are benefiting from New Zealanders buying their goods and services which allow them to employ people which in turn boosts spending in the economy. Nevertheless the outlook does remain uncertain. The recent case of the Australian traveller in Wellington with COVID-19 and Australia's growing outbreak which has prompted the alert level rises are signs that a resurgence in COVID cases around the world can make the economic environment more volatile and we need to be cautious in response to that.Arena Williams: What constraints are there on the economy during the pandemic?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The economy's performance has exceeded the expectations of most but the recovery does remain uneven for some sectors and regions in New Zealand. There are supply chain issues which while mainly global in nature are affecting the economy. The balanced approach that we took in Budget 2021 is appropriate as we work through the uncertainty. We will continue to keep a lid on debt while targeting support where it is needed most to accelerate our recovery and tackle those longstanding issues around climate change housing and child wellbeing.
1. Question No. 1—Prime MinisterDr SHANE RETI (Deputy Leader—National) to the Prime MinisterORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Prime Minister1. Dr SHANE RETI (Deputy Leader—National) to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all of her Government's statements and actions? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes. In particular I stand by this Government's ability to deliver for New Zealanders and continue our strong economic recovery. Today we have increased main benefits by an initial $20 per week per person providing more support for 355000 New Zealanders; we've reinstated the training incentive allowance which was cut by the previous National Government; we have today launched the Ministry for Ethnic Communities; we have increased paid parental leave to a maximum of $621.76 per week; we have extended the unsupported child's benefit and orphans benefit for short-term caregivers; and launched our new rebates for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles. This is just some of a long list of initiatives that the Government is delivering on. Dr Shane Reti: Do the current child poverty results reflect the fact that a key policy tool is benefit increases that are being cancelled out by the soaring cost of living? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No. Dr Shane Reti: Why is one of her new three-year child poverty reduction targets exactly the same target she previously set and is pushing it out by three years an admission of failure of one of her primary targets? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the second part of the question no. We are on track to meet the 10-year targets. The initial three-year targets that were set were ambitious. We have now made further three-year targets but we are on track for the 10-year targets. Dr Shane Reti: How has the $100 a week increase in rents since she became Prime Minister affected the likelihood this year of her achieving all of the first set of child poverty targets? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On behalf of the Prime Minister: what I do know is that on all nine indicators around child poverty we have seen good progress under this Government. The Government has never denied that there is more to do but the significant investments we've made in lifting the income of the lowest-income New Zealanders is making a significant difference in lifting children out of poverty. Dr Shane Reti: Why are there 1500 more children living in poverty on the Government's primary measure A compared to when she took office in 2017? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The member is wrong as he said in his press release yesterday. He was wrong then as well. If he takes the measure from the correct date where we are measuring on what this Government is responsible for he will in fact see 25000 fewer children in poverty. Dr Shane Reti: When does she plan to achieve the target of lifting 100000 children out of poverty given from when they've came into Government there are 1500 more children living in poverty on one measure? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The member as I said in my last supplementary answer is wrong on that matter.