edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
9. Tourism—International Visitor LevyHon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) to the Minister of TourismTourism—International Visitor Levy9. Hon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) to the Minister of Tourism: Does he stand by all his statements and actions in relation to the Tourism portfolio?Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister of Tourism): Yes in the context they were given.Hon Jacqui Dean: What percentage of the $57 million to $80 million raised from the international visitor levy will be used up in collection administration and distribution?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The money that's going to be collected through the international visitor levy will be divided between tourism and conservation. We've got a consultation document out and we are expecting to hear from the sector as to what they think the split should be.Hon Jacqui Dean: Is he really saying that he doesn't know how much the Government is proposing to spend on collection administration and distribution costs?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No. What I said is that we're consulting with the sector on what the split should be.SPEAKER: Order! It is now the fourth time that the Leader of the Opposition has improperly interjected. He is the senior member of the Opposition and I think he should show a bit of leadership around obeying the rules.Hon Jacqui Dean: Does he agree with the recent report from Deloitte that says international visitors contributed $3.2 billion or 3 percent of the general tax taken in 2017 and which concludes that tourism visitors are already making a proportionate tax contribution to New Zealand?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Tourists are making a decent contribution but also just in terms of the international visitor levy I believe that the impact on it is going to be 0.84 percent. In other words the international visitor levy isn't going to make any difference and GST is just one way that tourists contribute.Tamati Coffey: What support has the Minister received on the implementation of an international tourist and conservation levy?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I have received reports from businesses local government and industry supporting the levy—comments like: It is clear that people living in a booming place with infrastructure challenges need some sort of tourism tax." "It's very hard to believe small charges would have any great impact on visitor numbers." and "Doing nothing is not an option." Those comments were from the Leader of the Opposition Simon Bridges and the former Minister of Tourism John Key. I thank them for their support."
8. Prisons—Definition of Low-level OffendersHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney) to the Minister of JusticePrisons—Definition of Low-level Offenders8. Hon MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney) to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by all his statements and actions regarding his Government's justice policies?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Justice): Yes in the context in which they were made or conducted. I particularly stand by my statement regarding the Judith Collins 2014 Family Court changes that What we are seeing now is incredible delays in the Family Court and particularly where children are concerned that's not fair."Hon Mark Mitchell: In light of his statements on the weekend regarding low-level offenders in prison what is a low-level offender?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: There are offenders going through our criminal justice system who according to the sentences available to courts to impose on those offenders are regarded as at the low-level offending end of the spectrum. Some of those offenders are repeat offenders and some wind up in prison. The challenge that we all face is whether we continue the previous Government's promotion of an American-style criminal justice system or whether we actually do something to fix the problem.Hon Mark Mitchell: Are non-violent class A drug dealers low-level offenders?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: As I said in the interview which I think the member was alluding to previously it is simply not possible to make a generalisation about such a statement. Where the class A drug offending entails stand-over tactics and violence then prison is the right place for that offender.Hon Mark Mitchell: Are prisoners who commit indecent assault low-level offenders?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The member is alluding to the offender I referred to in a question last week relating to the pinching of a prison officer's bottom. The issue there is that however insidious unwelcome and unacceptable that nature of offending is seven years in prison without parole is not the right sanction for it.Hon Mark Mitchell: Are prisoners who commit indecent assault low-level offenders?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I think I've answered that question previously."
7. State Services—WagesVIRGINIA ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister of State ServicesState Services—Wages7. VIRGINIA ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister of State Services: What action is he taking to lift the wages for the lowest-paid workers in our public services?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of State Services): Last week I announced that the lowest-paid workers in the core Public Service will receive at least the 2018 living wage of $20.55 an hour from 1 September. This will lift the wages of 2000 workers across 13 Government departments including some clerical workers administration workers welfare workers and contact centre workers.Virginia Andersen: What else is the Government doing to lift wages and conditions for workers on low incomes?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The Government has also set new clear expectations for employment relations in the State sector that employers will work to narrow the gap between the highest and lowest earners in their organisations. We're also progressing pay equity claims and initiatives to close the gender pay gap. Of note of those who will benefit from the living wage announcement 70 percent are women. For the lowest-paid workers in New Zealand this Government is raising the minimum wage to $20 an hour by 1 April 2021 and 384000 families and children will be better off by an average of $75 per week from the Families Package when it's fully rolled out.
6. Health Minister—Counties Manukau District Health BoardJAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) to the Minister of HealthHealth Minister—Counties Manukau District Health Board6. JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his statements actions and voicemails in relation to the Counties Manukau DHB?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Health): Yes in the context they were made and taken. [Minister remains standing]SPEAKER: One of you sit down.Jami-Lee Ross: Why did he ignore pleas from Counties Manukau District Health Board (DHB) acting Chair Rabin Rabindran who in phone calls and text messages repeatedly asked him to stop making statements that were false and damaging to Mr Rabindran's reputation?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I reject the assertion. What I will say is that Mr Rabindran did indicate to me that he was concerned about his reputation and that is why I was keen to offer him the potential for other roles in order to give him a gracious exit.Jami-Lee Ross: If he rejects the assertion of my previous question did he read the text message to him on 24 April where Mr Rabindran said—and I quote—I need to draw your attention to your comment to the media that is being continuously quoted that I apologised for not telling you about the state of the other buildings which is not correct."?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: My concern that I expressed to the media was that the state of other buildings was not raised with me when we met face to face. There are across New Zealand more than a hundred buildings that are not up to scratch but when I visit DHBs as they did with the Scott building I expect those issues to be brought my attention face to face not buried in a report.Jami-Lee Ross: Why did he allow his office to put pressure on the CEO of the Counties Manukau DHB not to release documents that would've contradicted his own public statements that he wasn't briefed on the visit on 13 March—a situation the CEO describes as expecting her to "suck it up"?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I reject the premise of that question.Jami-Lee Ross: Has he seen or received a copy of the chief executive's email to district health board members which is now public and which says "Unfortunately we are under some pressure from the Minister's office about what we can and can't say." and also says—I quote—"[they] want us esp me to 'suck it up'."?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I have subsequently seen a copy of the email. I would note that the DHB commented frequently in the media on all of these issues.Jami-Lee Ross: Did he meet the Cabinet Manual standard of acting lawfully and to the highest ethical standards when his voicemail message on 18 April tried to stop Mr Rabindran from speaking publicly by offering to appoint him to future positions?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I reject the member's assertion."
4. KiwiBuild—SupplyPAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai) to the Minister of Housing and Urban DevelopmentKiwiBuild—Supply4. PAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai) to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development: Is the Government progressing work towards the targets of 1000 KiwiBuild homes built in 2018/19 5000 in 2019/20 and 10000 in 2020/21; if so how?Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Housing and Urban Development): Yes. In the first years houses will be built on Housing New Zealand land that has been left vacant for years such as the first KiwiBuild homes in Papakura through the Land for Housing programme and through Buying off the Plans in private developments that otherwise would not progress or would be built more slowly. Large-scale developments like that at the Unitec block will take longer to get under way but will add large numbers of KiwiBuild homes over time. We have set ambitious targets because we are a Government that wants families to have a fair shot at owning a place of their own. We're going to do our best to meet those targets.Paul Eagle: What will be the mix of Buying off the Plans Housing New Zealand and the Land for Housing programme?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I'm advised that a large number of stalled developments are ready to go. This Government will back them to build homes for Kiwi families. We expect that Buying off the Plans will build 700 to 800 homes in the first year. Housing New Zealand and Land for Housing will build at least 200 to 300 homes this coming year. This mix of sources for KiwiBuild homes means we can build them on both Crown land and privately owned land and get more homes—Hon Dr Nick Smith: You promised 10000 a year.Hon PHIL TWYFORD: —built faster.SPEAKER: Order! Dr Smith—Paul Eagle: Supplementary—SPEAKER: No sorry. Before you go Mr Eagle Dr Smith can you at least get your interjections accurate.Hon Dr Nick Smith: They promised 10000 a year.SPEAKER: That's much better.Paul Eagle: Who will be eligible to buy a KiwiBuild home?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well even people who have good jobs—for example teachers tradies office workers—have found themselves locked out of buying their first home by the national housing crisis. KiwiBuild has always been about restoring the Kiwi Dream for our families. Cabinet will soon consider the final details of the eligibility criteria and I look forward to announcing them soon after.
1. Families Package—Impact and ReactionKIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSFamilies Package—Impact and Reaction1. KIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What feedback has the Government received on the Families Package?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The Government is already receiving supportive feedback from New Zealanders in anticipation of the full impact of the Families Package coming into effect on 1 July. Writing to the Prime Minister one mother said Seeing the Families Package and everything else that you have done and my family actually benefiting from it I feel so much lighter. We both work hard but we felt like we were just working to pay the bills with no money left for other necessities—e.g. clothing and medical." The correspondent goes on: "I no longer feel like a failure although in my kids' eyes I know I'm not. So thank you again for making it better for us parents to help keep our children healthy safe fed warm and happy. With a tear in my eye I just can't thank you enough." I'm proud of this Government for assisting Kiwi families who found it tough just to get on for far too long.SPEAKER: I'm just going to warn the Minister that supplementary replies are going to be succinct given the extreme length of the initial answer.Kiritapu Allan: What feedback has the Government received on the winter energy payment?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We've heard from Kiwis who have found themselves in tough circumstances as a result of not being able to pay the power bills. As one correspondent said "Thank you so much for the extra money for power. What an amazing surprise and relief that is. As a sickness beneficiary trying to balance unwellness finances and life on the bare minimum which can be challenging the extra money will make such a difference."Kiritapu Allan: In what other ways could New Zealanders such as these be better off through the Families Package?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Families Package will assist middle and low income New Zealanders in a number of ways beyond the winter energy payment: the accommodation supplement increases that are already in place increasing Working For Families tax credits and raising the abatement threshold introducing the Best Start payment to assist families during the critical early years of a child's life increasing paid parental leave to 26 weeks and reinstating the independent earner tax credit. I am proud to be part of a Government that is willing to tackle issues such as child poverty head on and with our Families Package we're doing exactly that.Hon Amy Adams: How many New Zealand families either by number or proportion will in fact be worse off as a consequence of the decisions in the mini-Budget and the imposition of new and additional petrol taxes?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I don't have all of that information with me but what I can say is that 384000 families will be better off by $75 per week on average when this package is fully rolled out."
Penk Chris; Williams PotoCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to speak on this Part 2 of the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill for as long as I can manage ahead of the closing-time bell. These amendments to other Acts are what we might call consequential amendments meaning of course in a technical sense that they flow as a consequence of this amendment bill. But they're also consequential in the other meaning of that word: they are significant. They are significant in lots of different ways and that is reflected by the fact that they change so many other pieces of legislation.Colleagues have touched on the fact that these changes are 15 percent more consequential than they would otherwise be except that GST is applied to this. A tax upon a tax" is the phrase that's been used by several other speakers so there is no need for me to repeat that now.Hon Ruth Dyson: You just did.CHRIS PENK: And I think in my time that remains if I can manage any more comments without interruption by the Hon Ruth Dyson—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): I apologise to the member. The time has come for me to report progress.House resumed.The Chairperson reported progress on the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill and no progress on the Taxation (Neutralising Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) Bill.Report adopted.The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m."
Hipkins Chris; Macindoe TimHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Under Speaker's ruling 117/2—a ruling made by Speaker Smith back in 2010—where the committee has negatived a number of amendments that have substantially the same effect the Chair can effectively rule further amendments to do the same thing out of order. The committee has now voted down a series of amendments all effectively doing the same thing but with a slightly different effect in that they exempt a different group of people—[Interruption] CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Points of order are heard in silence.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Therefore I'll put it to you Madam Chair that you would now consider—in the spirit of the wider ruling that goes with this ruling that Speaker Smith made at the time which was to stop the committee having to contend for hours on end with dealing with very similar amendments—ruling the remaining amendments out of order.Hon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I notice that the Leader of the House has just suggested that all of the amendments have been similar in nature but in fact the amendment that we are voting on at the moment in my name refers to commercial rural purposes which is substantially different from the horticultural amendments that we have voted on previously. If we were to say that all of those should be conflated in that way then there really wouldn't be any point in considering amendments at all. Yet my colleagues have tonight put forward a vast array of amendments across a substantially wide range of topics and I would suggest to you that it's a cute attempt by the Leader of the House but it certainly doesn't apply to these amendments.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): I thank the members. The question of the number of different amendments that have been put and whether they have all had the same effect is actually for the Chair to decide and in fairness to compare it with the ruling that Speaker Smith gave when we were considering 30000 as against less than a dozen is hardly a fair comparison. However I do take the point and I did consider it and decided that the exemptions requested were different enough that it was worthwhile proceeding.
Luxton Jo; Tolley AnneJO LUXTON (Labour): I move That the question be now put.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): I call Erica Stanford.Hon Members: It's Denise Lee.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Oh sorry. I beg your pardon.
Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): There are a hundred million reasons why the people of Nelson and Tasman are concerned about the impact of Part 1 of this bill because this bill would give the power to take an extra $100 million out of my community at the same time the Government is saying it's going to invest less in the transport needs of the communities of Nelson and Tasman.Mark Patterson: Rubbish.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Now I hear the New Zealand First MP interjecting. I would suggest to him: has he read the speeches from Winston Peters on what he called highway robbery? What Winston Peters said was that to impose an excise tax and to put GST on top of it was nothing short of highway robbery and yet that is exactly what this part of this bill does. The regional petrol tax that's proposed in this part is at the same time as the Minister in the chair Phil Twyford is proposing to reduce investment in State highways by 70 percent. So let's not be cute. This part says to a community like mine Pay more get less"—pay more get less—and that is why members on this side of the House will fight this bill this part every step of the way.I'm looking forward to any member—any member—on the Government benches explaining to the public the integrity of saying to voters only nine months ago "No new taxes" and then a bill and this part that proposes exactly that—introducing new taxes on constituents. It's all the worse for the fact that the analysis shows that those that will be most adversely affected are actually those lower-income earners that actually voted—many of them mistakenly—for members opposite.The further point I want to make is the flaws in regional petrol tax policy. If we read the analysis by Treasury and if we read the analysis by the Ministry of Transport for a little country of 4.7 million people the idea that you can somehow impose a tax just in some regions is a nonsense. I was stunned when Jami-Lee Ross challenged the Minister when the Auckland petrol tax comes into effect a bit more than a week away and asked for a reassurance that people in regional New Zealand—like Nelson—would not be paying it and the Minister could give no assurance at all basically undermining the very tenet that somehow a regional petrol tax will only be paid by that region.In my area the current petrol tax amounts to $100 million a year. That is more than what many of my constituents pay each year in rates and that is why I have tabled an amendment that specifically exempts my communities of Nelson and Tasman from the extra costs. I say to the members opposite that's because your Government is saying to my high-growth area "You can expect no new investment."Now I'm proud of the Ruby Bay Bypass and the many other major transport projects that have been built in my area. But it is morally reprehensible—morally reprehensible—that members opposite want to impose costs on my constituents at the same time they are saying to them they're going to reduce by 70 percent the funding on our transport infrastructure and that is why I urge support for my amendment."
Urgent Debate Declined — Counties Manukau District Health Board—Minister of Health's Actions
Speaker's Rulings — Classification of Bills—Overseas Investment Amendment Bill
Mallard TrevorURGENT DEBATES DECLINEDCounties Manukau District Health Board—Board Appointments and RemovalsSPEAKER: I have received a letter from Jami-Lee Ross seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the actions of the Minister of Health in relation to the appointment and removal of members of the Counties Manukau District Health Board. This is a case of particular recent occurrence—in fact it's a particular case of recent occurrence that involves ministerial responsibility. Urgent debates are held on matters that require the immediate attention of the House. On the information presented to me I am not persuaded that the matter requires the urgent attention of the House. A better opportunity to examine it will arise in the Health Committee's Estimates hearing for Vote Health which is being held tomorrow and in the subsequent Estimates debate. The application is therefore declined.
Thursday 24 May 2018 - Volume 729
Faafoi KrisHon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Civil Defence): I move That this debate be now adjourned.Motion agreed to.
Points of Order — Standing Orders—Leave for Sessional Order
Brownlee Gerry; Mallard TrevorPOINTS OF ORDERStanding Orders—Leave for Sessional OrderHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I seek leave for a sessional order to delete Standing Order 387(1) and replace it with Sixty supplementary questions can be asked to the 12 primary questions on a proportional basis as advised by the Clerk of the House."—for that debate to be taken forthwith.SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that process. Is there any objection? There is objection."
Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—Speaker's Judgment
Brownlee Gerry; Mallard TrevorPersonal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—Speaker's JudgmentHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Yesterday you required the Hon Paula Bennett to withdraw and apologise for a statement that you heard her make on the way out the door when she left the House. We've looked at the transcript—the Hansard—we've considered whether a statement could have been made by asking those relevant people nearby what it could have been and all we're left with is a statement by the Hon Paula Bennett that it was not worth staying and that she would leave the session. Then there was a question from you asking For how long?" Her reply was "Just for today." at which point you thanked her. When she returned to deliver her Budget speech you required her to withdraw and apologise for something that she had said. Mr Speaker if we're going to have rules in here about what can and can't be said what might or might not offend you then could you tell us please what was the offensive word or words or construction of words that had not been recorded by Hansard?Hon Chris Hipkins: Speaking to the—SPEAKER: No no. I'll just deal with this one. Very quickly the member made comments when she was on her feet as she was leaving. That is disorderly.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Last week you I think quite appropriately ruled out the use of the word "bribe" as a descriptor for Government policy. But you also then went on to say that once that is ruled out and in the case of—it was actually yesterday—yesterday a penalty given—SPEAKER: I'm now going to interrupt the member and say that—the member will resume his seat—time has passed for that to be brought up as a point of order. Mr Bennett if you have more expertise then I think you should probably advise Mr Brownlee.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: A point of order the Hon Gerry Brownlee—not on the same matter.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): Well you have leapt—again—to a conclusion and decided to rule on your own understanding of what you thought was about to come.SPEAKER: Well I'll give the member a chance to promote something which is a proper point of order—Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well I'm asking you—SPEAKER: —and the member doesn't ask me questions; he raises points of order.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Is it now your ruling that the word "bribe" cannot be used in conjunction with a description of a Government policy but can be used as rhetorical comment from a Government Minister—in this case the Prime Minister—responding to a question that had been ruled out of order?SPEAKER: I'm quite reluctant to get involved in something which is absolutely inappropriate to be brought up now but that member knows that the content of questions the contents of answers and the contents of debates are all treated in their own context and with different standards. The member has been here a long time and he knows that."
Points of Order — Speakers and Presiding Officers—Conduct
Brownlee Gerry; Hipkins ChrisPOINTS OF ORDERSpeakers and Presiding Officers—ConductHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Yesterday we wrote to you asking you to consider some matters that were set out in the letter the first of which was our ongoing concern about your involvement in briefing the media alleging that a National MP made the statement about the Prime Minister calling her a stupid little girl". We asked that you contact us before 2 p.m. today at the start of question time to clear this matter up because quite clearly a Speaker briefing the media on a matter that is critical of the Opposition particularly when all those who could have made the statement have made it clear they did not when many who have listened to the tapes and considered the transcript cannot find evidence of it ever being said with the only person left who claims to have heard it being the Speaker then we are in a position where the Speaker has taken a very strong adversarial role towards the Opposition. Given the size of the Opposition that is a difficult position for any Speaker to be in. The question that I would ask Mr Speaker is: did you brief the media about the allegation that a National MP called the Prime Minister a "stupid little girl"?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): The matters that have been raised by the shadow Leader of the House as Speakers' rulings make clear are matters that should be raised with the Speaker outside of the House and not in the House. In fact the kinds of reflections on the Chair inherent in the point of order that Mr Brownlee just raised are themselves disorderly.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): We sent a letter to the Speaker making it clear after we had read in various media places that the Speaker had acknowledged that he had heard the statement. If he's the only one who heard it it raises the question about how did the statement then get into the media? I asked on the day in this House "What was the statement?" and the Speaker felt that the statement calling the Prime Minister "a stupid little girl" was inappropriate for the House and did not repeat it. The question then is how did it make its way into the media? The member might like to say "Well raising this creates a degree of disorder." Let me tell you the degree of disorder has well and truly been created by the way in which that particular statement has found its way into the media.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: Fairly soon I'd like to come to a point of order.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Mr Speaker if a member has raised a concern with the Speaker outside of the House or indeed in the House and is dissatisfied with the response to that the only appropriate course of action is to set down a notice of motion about that matter. There are very clear Speakers' rulings about that. In fact it is the first Speaker's ruling concerning reflections on the Chair that says that if members have a concern they can set down a notice of motion—and that is the way to raise the matter not through further points of order."
Hipkins ChrisTHURSDAY 24 MAY 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Karakia.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Today the House adjourns until Tuesday 12 June. The Budget debate will conclude on that day. Other business for the week will include the remaining stages of the Taxation (Neutralising Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) Bill the second readings of the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill and the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Amendment Bill and the continued committee stage of the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill. Wednesday will be a members' day but will also include debate on the 2018 Investment Statement instead of the general debate.
Wednesday 23 May 2018 - Volume 729
Families Commission Act Repeal Bill — Third Reading
King MattMATT KING (National—Northland): The Government will be happy to hear that I'll only have a short contribution to this. We support the bill because it's our work—it's our work. But I will acknowledge the Hon Carmel Sepuloni for taking this bill through the House. I can see it's in her blood. She's passionate about it; it's patently obvious. So I'd like to acknowledge her for that work. I also want to refer to Jan Logie. She talked about house insulation. I'm not going to acknowledge her in a nice way but she talked about house insulation and she boo-hooed data-driven—and I thought to myself isn't that the irony of that in that we in consultation with the Greens and working with the Greens insulated more homes than any other Government. So if she wants to go into coalition with us in 2020 she'd better sharpen up.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): The member needs to come to the bill.MATT KING: OK I'm back to the bill—back to the bill. So I make no apologies for having data-driven decisions made—no apologies whatsoever. The social investment policy is all about data. I hear social investment" and then I hear the name change. The Government call it social well-being. That's a bit like TPP and CPTPP—same thing. Just add a couple of things change it around a bit—same thing. So I'm really happy to hear that you're carrying that on—really happy to hear.Look this social investment approach—or call it social well-being. I relate a story from many years ago where I wish that this policy had been in.Greg O'Connor: War stories.MATT KING: Yeah a war story there Greg O'Connor. Some the data that we got from that longitudinal study from Otago was if you're a single parent or alcoholic if there was violence in the family—all those risk indicators—the high likelihood is that that person's going to end up going to jail. That's data—you know that's a data-driven approach. I remember a young lad that was six or seven years old and he was living with his dad who was an alcoholic and a violent alcoholic at that. He used to lock his boy in the dog kennel in the back of his ute and go to the pub for four hours at a time. We didn't know that at the time but what chance did he have of ever having a life? He started out stealing breaking into cars and doing burglaries and he ended up doing major robberies and now he's doing serious time for armed robberies. So the social investment social well-being data-driven model would hopefully intervene and recognise that he was a high risk for those risk factors and would intervene at an earlier stage and hopefully turn his life around and have a better outcome. So we support this bill. We support the social investment - social well-being policy. I've said enough. I commend it to the House."
Radhakrishnan PriyancaPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise to take a very short call at the third reading of the Families Commission Act Repeal Bill. This is a very straightforward bill. Basically what it does is revoke the Families Commission Act 2003 which will then disestablish the commission. It also allows for processes to manage the consequences of that disestablishment.I think I've spoken about this bill in its previous readings as well and have gone into what it will do and how some of the work will be carried on. Colleagues have also gone into that this evening so I'll keep mine brief. I just want to acknowledge that the work of the Families Commission over the years has been vast and has been very valuable. In my former life I've had a fair bit to do with the Families Commission so I just want to take this opportunity to thank the current commissioner Len Cook but also former commissioners—including our own former Labour MP Dr Rajen Prasad as well—board members of the Families Commission and staff over the years who've worked tirelessly on so many pieces of work that have been led by the Families Commission.I also take this opportunity to thank Ministers on both sides of the House who've been involved with the commission and the work of the commission and also the work that has gone into this bill. I want to thank the current Minister the Hon Carmel Sepuloni for her leadership with regard to this bill and also in terms of more broadly improving social well-being for New Zealanders. With that I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I'll rise tonight to take a very short call on the Families Commission Act Repeal Bill in its third reading. The bill will be repealing the Families Commission Act of 2003 and it does in effect disestablish the Families Commission which has been operating as the social policy evaluation and research unit (SuPERU). I did take the opportunity during the second reading speech and through the committee stage to acknowledge the work of the board who did a sterling job—a very capable board—and thank them for their time and the expertise that they brought to this discussion.It's just another step forward in some more efficiencies and effectiveness within the social investment system that was established by the National Party and the establishment of the social investment board and the Social Investment Agency has now made SuPERU obsolete hence the need for this bill.It's certainly heartening to see the National Party see more of its hard work being dealt with in this House and especially so far up the Order Paper. It's very nice to see that it is being dealt with and that we are tying up these loose ends. I'm not sure what that tells us actually—maybe it's just that there's no other legislation of significance for the Government to be sending to the House. But anyway we're happy to help in filling up the Order Paper.This is a very small bill and it's simply wrapping up the loose ends. Because SuPERU is being disestablished it does require the repeal of the Families Commission Act of 2003. Most of the work as we've already heard tonight—all of the work in fact—has been either delegated or commissioned by other entities. For instance the contract for Growing Up in New Zealand and the Superu Children and Families Research Fund has been transferred over to the Ministry of Social Development.The bill has been through the select committee process. The Social Services and Community Committee dealt with this and recommended in fact that the bill be passed with no alterations. There was unanimous support that there was no new evidence and so the bill will be passed without any changes at all. So there's nothing contentious in this legislation. I congratulate the work of the former Minister for Social Development Anne Tolley for the vision and the work that she led to bring about the social investment approach and I do look forward to the results of that work manifesting in a brighter future and more opportunities for vulnerable Kiwis. I take pleasure in commending this bill to the House.
Henare PeeniHon PEENI HENARE (Associate Minister for Social Development): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Thank you for this opportunity. I stand to support my colleague and a great Minister the Hon Carmel Sepuloni in the promotion of this bill in the third reading. For fear of repetition I'll keep this contribution relatively brief but I want to touch on a couple of points that I think need slightly more extension given the great comments and great contribution by the Minister.The social landscape in Aotearoa New Zealand is definitely changing. It's fluid it moves and the Government must move with it too. I take another point that the Minister mentioned around community involvement engagement and co-design. All of these fantastic opportunities afforded to people who are working in the social space in Aotearoa New Zealand can only be built when actually the reset button has been pushed.I want to support the words of the House that have extended congratulations to the Families Commission and the good work that they've done and to the social policy evaluation and research unit (SuPERU) and the good research that they've done over many years. Can I highlight one particular piece of work: that SuPERU actually finally stepped out of the box of working with only the concept of family and actually extending more into what whānau meant. I think that's a fundamental shift that was important. It was timely. In fact it was overdue. So I want to acknowledge in particular that piece of work undertaken by SuPERU and echo the words of the Hon Louise Upston in her comments talking about how those bodies of research will continue to serve this Government and Governments into the future around the decisions we make in this particular space for the well-being of families and of course communities far and wide.I'll stop there. I think much has been said but I just want to stand in support of the Minister the Hon Carmel Sepuloni and commend this bill to the House.
Taxation (Neutralising Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) Bill — Second Reading
Tolley AnneTAXATION (NEUTRALISING BASE EROSION AND PROFIT SHIFTING) BILLSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 22 May.DEPUTY SPEAKER: When we were debating this last Kiritapu Allan had the floor and she has eight minutes and 20 seconds remaining to speak.
Twyford PhilINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY COMMITTEEMembershipHon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Housing and Urban Development) on behalf of the Leader of the House: I move That under section 196 of the Intelligence and Security Act 2017 the House endorse Hon Gerry Brownlee as a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee nominated by the Leader of the Opposition under section 195(1) of the Act and in accordance with section 194(2)(c) of the Act.Motion agreed to.
Nash StuartHon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): I move That this debate be now adjourned. Motion agreed to.
Mallard Trevor; Bennett PaulaSPEAKER: No the member will resume her seat. The member as she left indicated to me that she would not be returning today and after she did that she made an unparliamentary comment as she was leaving the House. I'm not going to stop her changing her mind about coming back in the House but if I'd known she was coming back—if I thought she wanted to stay—I would have required her to withdraw and apologise. In fact I probably should have sent for her to do that. She will withdraw and apologise now for the comment she made as she left the House.Hon PAULA BENNETT (Deputy Leader—National): I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have absolutely no idea what I said or what you're talking about.SPEAKER: The member will resume her seat. What she should know is that when she is walking out of the House she should not make parting comments of a negative type to the Speaker. I know that well; I've done it before. I've been brought back in to withdraw and apologise and then sent out again. She's pretty lucky.Hon Paula Bennett: Speaking to the point of order the other—SPEAKER: No no there is no further speaking to the point of order. The member can either take the call—
Tuesday 22 May 2018 - Volume 729
12. Budget 2018—Benefits for MāoriRINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) to the Minister for Māori DevelopmentBudget 2018—Benefits for Māori12. RINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) to the Minister for Māori Development: What initiatives in Budget 2018 and the Government's 100-day plan will benefit Māori?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister for Māori Development): There are so many—so so many—which will give Māori an assurance that as we turn this waka around we're looking to improve the well-being in a number of ways such as the Families Package which will see a transfer of approximately $1.2 billion to Māori whānau. But let's go to the 100-day plan because that's where we see the real gains. We've raised the minimum wage to $16.50 since April. We've set child poverty targets and we know this is an area that crucially hurts a number of Māori children. We've stopped State house sell-offs which had a huge impact on a number of our whānau in our communities—SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! When I stand up the Minister sits down. She's had a fair crack.Rino Tirikatene: How will the Families Package benefit Māori whānau?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: This Budget is focused on whānau and the Families Package will transfer approximately $1.2 billion directly into the pockets of Māori families in a number of ways. But let's speak to the real impact that it could have—the winter energy payment for example. That will make a huge impact for a number of families including Māori and people can turn on their heater when they need it most. The other thing is that in terms of the Best Start tax credit approximately 17000 Māori babies will receive that and how much of a difference it will make to families who need it most. There's so much—SPEAKER: Order!Rino Tirikatene: How will the other initiatives help improve the lives of Māori?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Well there are a number of specific initiatives that really align with the priorities that the Government has set. For example we want to make sure that the young people who are disengaged from education employment and training will actually benefit. That's why we've set aside $15 million of which Minister Willie Jackson will be stewarding through $7 million around the Whenua Māori Fund because we know that Māori land owners need support to develop their land and potentially plug into other opportunities around regional development. But more importantly what we do in the space of papakāinga will not be just about building houses. It will be creating communities encouraging social enterprise and doing a lot of good for a lot of people.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister as to whether or not she's had representations on the improvement of Māori housing and health from the Leader of the Opposition who's discovered his Māoridom somewhat the way Columbus discovered America—purely by accident?SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! That question is ruled out and because we're at a point in question time where rebalancing is somewhat ineffectual I think there'll be a number of extra questions tomorrow which I'll communicate to the Opposition.
10. Prisons—Future of Waikeria PrisonHon DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) to the Minister of CorrectionsPrisons—Future of Waikeria Prison10. Hon DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) to the Minister of Corrections: Does he stand by all his recent decisions and statements relating to the corrections portfolio?Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister of Corrections): Yes in the context they were made.Hon David Bennett: When did the Minister first take a paper to Cabinet regarding plans over Waikeria and how many has he taken since then?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I can't remember the exact date but I have taken a couple of papers to Cabinet.Hon David Bennett: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister certainly would be able to remember a date—SPEAKER: Order! The question around the quality of the answer is one for me to judge and the Minister very clearly addressed the question and indicated that he could not remember the exact date. That's addressing the question.Hon David Bennett: How will the Minister guarantee the safety of corrections staff without the Waikeria Prison build when Public Services Association spokesperson Willie Cochrane has asked If [the] expansion isn't going ahead we want to hear what … he'll do to expand the capacity of our prisons in the short term and keep our members safe in the workplace."?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: We're aware of the concerns of corrections officers and the unions and take their feedback into account when making decisions.SPEAKER: Question No. 12—Hon David Bennett: Supplementary question?SPEAKER: No you've had all the supplementaries."
9. Budget 2018—Early Childhood EducationJAN TINETTI (Labour) to the Minister of EducationBudget 2018—Early Childhood Education9. JAN TINETTI (Labour) to the Minister of Education: How does Budget 2018 support quality and affordable education and care for children aged six and below?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): This year's Budget commits $105 million over four years to increase funding rates for early childhood education (ECE) centres and kōhanga reo. This is the first universal full inflation adjustment to subsidies for ECE centres and kōhanga reo in 10 years. It will assist them to manage increasing costs of provision and maintain the quality and affordability for parents and families. For a two-year-old enrolled in full-time education and care this could add up to an additional support of around $100 per year. Jan Tinetti: How is the coalition Government working with the early childhood sector to ensure that all children regardless of their background learning needs or disability receive early learning that enables them to learn and thrive in all aspects of their life? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: We're working with parents teachers stakeholders and communities to develop a new 10-year strategic plan for early childhood education building on the previous strategic plan for early childhood education discontinued by the last Government. We want to ensure that increasing participation in early childhood education is accompanied by an increase in the quality of early childhood education being received. We understand the importance of early learning and getting children off to a great start with their learning and we do know that the sector has been under significant pressure over the last decade. Jan Tinetti: What is the coalition Government doing to address the long waiting lists for early intervention services for children before they start school? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Budget 2018 has provided funding to halve the current waiting list for early intervention services for children before they start school. The $21.5 million being spent over the next four years will help over 7600 more children get the support that they need.