edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Nash Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNash Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 07 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10321. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.STUART NASH (Labour—Napier) to the Minister of Police: Does she agree with everything Prime Minister John Key has said about policing?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police): Yes and I particularly agreed with the Prime Minister when he said that he wanted me to be his Minister of Police.Stuart Nash: Does she agree with John Key’s statement “we want more police on the beat.”; if so why are there 568 fewer front-line general duties constables since National took office?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: As that member well knows just because people are called general duties constables in one particular year does not mean to say that they are not doing something in another year. We now have 600 extra police on the front line than we did when Labour left office thankfully at the end of 2008—600 more.Stuart Nash: I seek leave to table an Official Information Act request dated 25 May 2015 which actually shows 568 fewer general duties police—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Leave is sought to table that particular Official Information Act release. Is there any objection? There is objection.Stuart Nash: Does she agree with John Key’s statement that “We can and we must do better at reducing crime levels and keeping Kiwis safer.”; if so why are a record 90 percent of burglaries remaining unsolved?Mr SPEAKER: Either of those two supplementary questions the Hon Judith Collins.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Well of course I agree with the Prime Minister and that is why I am so thrilled that we now have the lowest recorded crime rate since 1978.Stuart Nash: Does she think John Key’s message to P dealers that “We will be ruthless in our pursuit of you and the evil drug you push.” meant anything given that police research in 2015 reveals it is easier to get this drug than ever before?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Absolutely and that is why that member should be congratulating the New Zealand Police on some of the most fantastic big busts that they have done recently.Stuart Nash: Why after 8 years of National in Government do 86 percent of police now think front-line officers are under-resourced and 74 percent of constables believe front-line police numbers are too low?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: The New Zealand Police is the most wonderful organisation full of now 600 more constables than there were when that member’s party was last in Government. Police always want to have more resources because they care about keeping New Zealand safe. There has never been a time that I can recall that police have not said that they want more resources. They always want more resources because they want to do the job so brilliantly.Stuart Nash: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I did not say “more resources”; I said “under-resourced”.Mr SPEAKER: The question has certainly been addressed. The member might not like the answer but it has been addressed.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 07 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10320. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister of Corrections: What initiatives has Corrections recently launched to support prisoners to lead a crime-free life on release?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections): Yesterday I attended the launch of a new initiative Seedlings Grow Cook and Eat which will see prisoners in self-care units grow their own seasonal vegetables and use them to cook basic nutritious meals at Spring Hill Corrections Facility. Prisoners in self-care units are nearing the end of their sentence and do their own cooking to prepare themselves for release. The produce grown in the gardens supplements store-purchased vegetables increasing the self-sufficiency of these units. This programme will help prisoners learn useful gardening skills as well as help them learn to cook meals nutritiously and economically. Initiatives such as this support positive life changes that can help prisoners to lead a crime-free life on release.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: What other initiatives does the Department of Corrections have under way?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: There is another new initiative in Hawke’s Bay Regional Prison’s young offenders unit which has four beehives that serve as a teaching tool for prisoners who are enrolled in studying there for their certificate in apiculture. The hives also provide a teaching tool for the prison’s national certificate in horticulture course which prisoners from the same unit are also studying for. Prisoners enrolled in the offender employment joinery course in the same unit assembled the hives and frames when they arrived and also painted them. Another group of young prisoners from the unit built the fence surrounding the hives under the tuition of a volunteer instructor. Almost 38 kilograms of honey was extracted from the hives when the first extraction of the season took place recently. The honey produced by bees and hives is donated to community groups in the Hastings area. This is a terrific example of giving back to the community and good for prisoners who are learning real-life employment skills.Mahesh Bindra: How does she square those answers with the 20 murders committed by offenders on bail between 2012 and 2014?Mr SPEAKER: It is marginal as to whether there is a connection but I will allow the Minister to answer.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Quite easily really. We are focused on rehabilitation and these are two new initiatives that we have undertaken.
Ngaro Alfred: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNgaro Alfred: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 07 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10315. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.ALFRED NGARO (National) to the Minister for Social Development: What recent announcements has she made regarding Child Youth and Family?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): Today I announced major reforms that will see a complete overhaul of Child Youth and Family. I received a detailed business case from my expert advisory panel making it clear that the current system is broken and must change if we are to get better life outcomes for our most vulnerable children. The overhaul will include establishing a new operating model that intervenes earlier provides truly effective services and support and includes the voice of the child in decisions about their care. This is no quick fix but it is about giving our most vulnerable young people the protection and life opportunities they deserve.Alfred Ngaro: What will the new operating model look like?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: The new model will focus on five core services: prevention intensive intervention care support and transition support services as well as youth justice services aimed at preventing reoffending. What is different about the model is that it will move from crisis management to focus on long-term outcomes for vulnerable children and will place their needs and voices at its heart. With funding following the child the new model will have the ability to directly purchase vital services needed by children their carers or families when they need them. We need to stop simply reacting to crises and focus more on harm prevention.Jacinda Ardern: How much will be reallocated from other Government departments to fund the activities of her proposed new entity given that the Ministry of Health for example is already having to remove frontline staff to resource her struggling children’s teams?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: As I explained to the member today when I briefed the Opposition parties that work is part of—and the Cabinet papers explain it to be part of—a stream of work that will be undertaken this year. The panel has made some estimates in its document which again has been made public but this Government is going to take the time to work its way through exactly how much will be required from other agencies and how much new money will be needed.Alfred Ngaro: How will direct purchasing help vulnerable children get access to the services they need?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Accessing the right supports and services when they are needed is vital to truly support our vulnerable children. Our staff should not have to negotiate with providers when a service is urgently required for our most vulnerable children. Much like ACC the new model will have the ability to directly purchase services such as health education trauma and counselling. These services could be purchased from district health boards education providers NGOs and specialist services such as psychologists. We need a system that gets these children the help that they deserve when they need it.
Scott Alastair: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeScott Alastair: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 07 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10309. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa) to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received about the management of the Government’s major investment projects?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): The Government has a large pipeline of investment projects and today we released the second performance report for the July-October 2015 quarter. This report provides an update on the 41 most complex Government projects and advises on the extent to which they are delivering on expectations. These projects are valued at $18.5 billion out of a total portfolio of a $76 billion lifetime cost of investment. This demonstrates the Government’s commitment to increase transparency and accountability. In fact I do not think any Government before in New Zealand has introduced this kind of transparency around its major investments.Alastair Scott: What improvements to the portfolio does this performance report show?Hon BILL ENGLISH: These 41 projects are being delivered by 22 different agencies. They are assessed on a five-point scale. The performance of the portfolio has improved since the last period; 54 percent of the projects are now green or amber-green compared with 42 percent in the previous period. Because the report covers the most complex and expensive investments it is not at all surprising that there are challenges in delivering them and that is why the ratings for the projects can change over time.Alastair Scott: What steps has the Government taken to improve transparency and accountability around the performance of the most complex of these projects?Hon BILL ENGLISH: This report is released three times a year. There is some delay to allow for commercial sensitivities around negotiations to pass. It complements the annual report on managing Government investment projects which covered the $6.4 billion of annual Government spending on all 409 investments that the Government is making. So we have one project covering the 41 most complex and most challenging and another report that covered the whole 400-plus projects showing the size of the pipeline of Government investment and the thorough accountability for how well taxpayers’ money is spent.Alastair Scott: How can greater transparency and accountability support the better management of the Government’s major investment projects?Hon BILL ENGLISH: There is no doubt that the publication of assessments of the projects has helped focus the minds particularly of officials. I want to acknowledge the efforts of hundreds of Government officials who are dealing with a range of complex projects from the Christchurch rebuild through to large-scale defence procurement who in my view are performing better than pretty well any other developed country in the world in delivering large complex projects on time and generally within budget.
Brownlee Gerry: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Business Statement[Sitting date: 07 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10309. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): It is indeed the Government’s intention—in fact it is the Business Committee’s intention. I thought it was not worth repeating something that clearly the member would have told his other members will actually happen on that day. But there will be three bills debated that particular day. They are all settlement bills following what is becoming I think quite a positive pattern in the Houseusing extended sittings to achieve those particular results.
Hipkins Chris: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Business Statement[Sitting date: 07 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10309. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): I wonder whether the Leader of the House could inform us whether it is still the Government’s intention to extend the sitting on Wednesday into Thursday.
Brownlee Gerry: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Business Statement[Sitting date: 07 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10309. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday12 April the Government will look to make progress on the Taxation (Residential Land Withholding Tax GST on Online Services and Student Loans) Bill the annual review debate and a number of other bills on the Order Paper.
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 07 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10309. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 7 April 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Business StatementHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday12 April the Government will look to make progress on the Taxation (Residential Land Withholding Tax GST on Online Services and Student Loans) Bill the annual review debate and a number of other bills on the Order Paper.CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): I wonder whether the Leader of the House could inform us whether it is still the Government’s intention to extend the sitting on Wednesday into Thursday.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): It is indeed the Government’s intention—in fact it is the Business Committee’s intention. I thought it was not worth repeating something that clearly the member would have told his other members will actually happen on that day. But there will be three bills debated that particular day. They are all settlement bills following what is becoming I think quite a positive pattern in the Houseusing extended sittings to achieve those particular results.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10308. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clauses 1 to 7 and schedule be agreed to.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Clauses 1 to 7 and schedule agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment presently.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Wellington Town Belt Bill with amendment and the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) without amendment.Report adopted.
Tisch Lindsay: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10308. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for the House to rise at this stage. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Ross Jami-Lee: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10308. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for the House to now adjourn.
Ross Jami-Lee: Business of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Business of the House[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10308. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for two things: firstly that Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori / Māori Language Bill next time it is considered in the Committee be considered as one debate and the second thing—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No we will deal with one thing at a time. Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? Then all questions will be taken as one question when we discuss that bill.
O'Rourke Denis: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10307. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First): I need to respond to what the last speaker Alfred Ngaro just said. There are three things I want to respond to. First of all he talked about this conflict of interest issue and he quoted either from official advice or from a submission I am not quite sure. But when he did so he mumbled the word “perception” so that hopefully we would not hear that word very clearly. He mumbled the word “perception” because that is the word that he used and that is the word that whoever gave this advice or made the submission used too. There may well be perceptions of conflicts of interest; we acknowledge that. But there are no actual potential conflicts of interest possible in this situation. Mr Ngaro and the National Party have totally failed to give any persuasive or rational argument at all to justify this claim of a potential conflict of interest. It just cannot occur. So he is wrong about that and I am disappointed that he mumbled the word “perception” in the hope that we would not hear it or understand it. But that is all it could ever be and that is not a good enough reason for legislation of this kind.The other point he made was about workloads. He is trying to tell me that a person can handle only one board membership in Auckland because Auckland is such a big important and busy city. Well I have been a member of a community board in Christchurch for 15 years.Paul Foster-Bell: 50 years?DENIS O’ROURKE: For 15 years. At the same time I was a member of the city council for 15 years and at the same time I was a director of three companies for several years—and the list goes on. So how can it be that people in Christchurch can handle these workloads satisfactorily but Aucklanders can handle only one little board? Even Aucklanders should be able to do better than that—even Aucklanders should be able to do better than that. The workload issue the workload claim as an argument is utter nonsense. Everyone in this House who is honest about it knows it.My final comment is this: Mr Ngaro talked about letting the people choose. He said no to that. That is what his argument is. He actually said: “No don’t let the people choose. Don’t let them have that freedom.” The justification he gave for that was that there needed to be greater representation. Well that is exactly what the people are deciding: what the representation will be. If they want it to be one person who is also a member of other boards then that is their free choice. But that does not affect whether there will be greater or smaller representation. That one person can still effectively—and I say “effectively”—be a member of more than one board. So that is also an incoherent argument that should be disregarded.
O'Rourke Denis: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First): I just wanted to respond to Mr Twyford concerning his views on conflicts of interest and in particular the point he made—which is a fair point—that boards are often in competition with each other for funding. That does not mean there is any conflict of interest. A particular person can on one board look at its needs and requirements for the coming year decide what money it is going to apply for and for what reasons and put the best possible argument forward for that and then go to another board and do exactly the same thing and there would be no conflict of interest—no conflict of interest. The only way there could be a potential conflict of interest would be for the person who is making the decision between those two applications but that is not the case here. We are talking only about the people making the applications not the person who is making the decision. So if you are not making the decision you are not in any conflict of interest situation.I am very glad that Mr Twyford put that reason up as the sole reason to justify the spurious conflict of interest argument because in doing so he demonstrated clearly that the argument is vacuous and does not really work as an argument. The truth is there are no potential conflicts of interest in this situation and even if by some miracle there were there are usually accepted methods of managing that by a person stepping back for the particular item being discussed and so on. That is what I meant when I introduced the principles used by commercial directors on commercial boards. I did not say as Mr Twyford maintained that that was an analogy. I said that members of commercial boards have ways of managing this professionally and acceptably and if any conflict of interest situation ever arose—which actually it cannot but if it did—there are proper and good ways of managing that.This conflict of interest argument can never be a justification for this bill. It can never be because it simply cannot happen. I would like to hear Mr Ngaro explain how it could and if he cannot well why does he not withdraw the bill? I have not heard him yet give any reason to justify this particular argument and if that is not the argument for it then what is? As I said in my first contribution I heard the three reasons given by Mr Shearer none of which was correct and I refuted them. As part of the process I went through and gave six reasons why this bill should not pass and it actually should not. It is wrong it is unnecessary and it is time that was recognised by National and in particular by the member in the chair Mr Ngaro. So let us give it up and trash it—let us get rid of it right now.
Shearer David: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShearer David: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10301. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert): Like my colleague before me said we are in support of this. It is a relatively small bill but it fixes something and I think fine-tunes perhaps something that started up with the super-city which was acknowledged as a problem. I think the arguments that have been put forward up until now have been absolutely right. We would support this firstly because with local boards they are local and you want people elected to those positions who live in that area who are genuinely local who therefore contribute to the fabric of the super-city at that level and are able to be intimately in touch with the locals whom they represent. To be on two or three other local boards—as David Cunliffe just said they are larger than an electorate—means you have got two or three electorate-sized areas that you are trying to represent. I do not think that is possible. Certainly as an MP I work very closely with our local board. We have a monthly meeting and I think that its role has evolved over time. I think for some time in the early stage of the super-city the board was marginalised. Now I actually think it plays a pretty important role.The second reason other than that I think that the person there should be local and therefore cannot be in two or three places because otherwise they are not local is that I think there are genuine conflicts of interest and Alfred Ngaro and Phil Twyford mentioned those. I do believe that for those reasons how could you represent one local board and have other interests in another local board including the drawing of two salaries which I think could possibly make that a problem as well?Lastly I agree with what Alfred Ngaro said before and that is that we have a lot of very committed local people there who want to have a go. By having one person in a sense taking three positions it means that other people who are genuinely out there who want to have a go—perhaps they do not have the profile in the community as some of these others who have come through but nevertheless will be the up and coming and the future as well.For those three reasons we support this bill; certainly I support this bill. It has been talked about as being some sort of a conspiracy theory targeted at two or three different people. I do not think that that is the case. I think that this is a trend that is growing—that people see this as a sort of a vocation to stand on many boards. I do not think that is what boards are about and they should be about standing up for our local community. Thank you.
Cunliffe David: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCunliffe David: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10301. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn): I am going to make this very quick. It is good to see the member who has just resumed his seat Mr Ngaro proposing this bill. Labour supports it. We support it for all the reasons that my good colleague Phil Twyford has said. Firstly Warren Flaunty good gentleman of west Auckland where we hail from who has been on five local boards or hospital boards concurrently collecting it might be noted five salaries for doing five jobs. He must not sleep because I do not know how any human being could do justice to the constituents of five jobs at the same time.This is not life the universe and everything. This is not going to solve world hunger. It is not going to demilitarise North Korea. It is not going to solve youth suicide. What it will do is remove a little annoying inconsistency in our local government law and Labour supports the bill.What fascinates me about the member who has just resumed his seat Alfred Ngaro is that for about two-thirds of that contribution I was not quite sure which side he was going to come down on but I am glad he has come down in support of his own member’s bill because it is worth supporting.I think the other reason that Mr Twyford has advanced for this is also really important. We have got to take local boards seriously. The truth of it is that as designed the work of local boards is more substantive than the old community boards that they have replaced in the Auckland context. The rohe or the ward is larger than a general electorate seat and that has to be taken seriously. There are seven positions in the ward that mainly covers my electorate and they are real jobs. We work closely with those people and I cannot understand how anyone could be on more than one local board let alone five. So I would say: let us give the public the focus and the commitment that they deserve—let us put this rule change through so that people are restricted to actually standing where it matters most and choose one and do it well. Thank you.
Borrows Chester: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10297. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
Ross Jami-Lee: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10297. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for all clauses in this bill to be debated and taken as one question.
O'Rourke Denis: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First): I just wanted to respond to one thing that the member who just spoke Grant Robertson said because I am not convinced by his answer particularly. It is about the principles. I would say to him and to the people who drafted this bill and to the Committee as a whole which might be interested in this issue that the words used in clause 4(1)(b) and all of those subparagraphs there are all prefatory and not imperative words to use the legal terminology. It does not help if the introduction says “In performing its role … the Council must” because what the council must do is have regard to principles that are stated in a non-imperative way so in the end it does not necessarily have to comply with those principles.I would have thought that that is important. If it were me I would redraft all of that because I think it could be a problem. I think in the future somebody may well seize on this for some reason or another. I just make the point to be helpful. It could I think really improve the bill if those words were imperative and not prefatory in the way that they are stated.That would help a lot but if the member and the Committee do not think that is necessary then that is fine. They intend that the Committee intends that and that is the way it will be interpreted in the future. But just be aware that there is an issue.
Sepuloni Carmel: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSepuloni Carmel: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10292. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston): Mr Chair! [Interruption] Apologies for scaring the staff of the House. Basically there were so many questions that I had for the member who sponsors the bill Grant Robertson but he has been so forthcoming with information that he has actually pre-empted many of the questions that I had particularly those around Supplementary Order Paper 169 in his name regarding leases and licences in clauses 16 and 17.I am always interested in the submissions that come in and the viewpoints that we get from the public and I do notice that there were 30 submissions made on this bill and almost all of them were in support of this bill. I just wanted to know from the member for the two submissions that opposed parts of the bill whether their opposition was addressed by the Supplementary Order Paper. You had two people who opposed the bill out of 30 submissions and so were any of their concerns addressed through the Supplementary Order Paper?Really other than that I just want to congratulate the excellent member for Wellington Grant Robertson—what a great representative you are for the Wellington region. I also do want to acknowledge just one other person in the House and that is Paul Foster-Bell because he managed not only to get his bill through tonight but also to make mention of it in the third reading of the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill and to make mention of it during the Committee stage of this bill. So well done Paul Foster-Bell for being an effective member; a shameless member. But moving the lens away from Paul Foster-Bell and back on to Grant Robertson—well done Grant Robertson for being the effective member for Wellington Central.
Borrows Chester: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10282. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.
Robertson Grant: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10282. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question.
Henare Peeni: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHenare Peeni: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10280. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PEENI HENARE (Labour—Tāmaki Makaurau): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. After a long night last night in the House here speaking Te Reo Māori I thought today I would practise my English. I rise to make a short contribution on this particular bill the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill. Given that so many members across the House in particular from the Government are really keen to talk about the Christian heritage and the proud Christian heritage of New Zealand I thought I would just take them on a short history lesson.In 1814 the first sermon was given at Ōihi Bay by Te Matenga otherwise known as Marsden and he delivered that with the support of Ruatara. So it precedes the 1844 opening of the particular Church down in Nelson. Further in 1840 just before the Church opened in 1844 some members might be interested to know that article 4 of the Treaty of Waitangi supported by Bishop Pompallier allowed for religion here. Admittedly it was rather narrow in its view but it said in article 4: E mea ana Te Kāwana ko ngā whakapono katoa o Ingarangi o ngā Wētēriana o Roma me Te Ritenga Māori hoki e tiakina ngātahitia.[The Governor says that all English religions Wesleyan Catholic and Māori beliefs as well are protected simultaneously.]So what that did was it allowed for the Churches to take their place here in Aotearoa. Then of course we have in 1844 as the members from across the House have already mentioned in Nelson the Church was open.Moving to this bill we stand in support of this particular bill. We think it is just a positive way forward. I am reminded of another Māori whakataukī that says “Ka pū te ruha ka hāo te rangatahi”—it is about time that the old net was put to the side and the new net goes fishing—and that is what this bill provides for the Church. As the bill indicates it empowers these Churches to move on into the future and indeed it will help them support a lot of the good social aspects that the House has talked about this evening. So I want to rise in support of it.I will not talk too much longer. But I do want to in conclusion just thank the member for bringing the bill to the House and the select committee for the hard work that it has done and as mentioned earlier for the collegial nature of the debate—and of course the progression of this bill from the beginning to now. Thank you.
Sepuloni Carmel: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSepuloni Carmel: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10278. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston): It is a privilege to speak in the third reading of the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill. I think that everything that needs to be said about this bill has really been said. I would like to correct the member who just spoke before me Mark Mitchell. I was interjecting earlier but I was interjecting in support of the bill and in support of the wise words that he was sharing with the House. So it is disappointing that he took those interjections the wrong way. Perhaps he did not hear. I would not like to think that he was just demonstrating a lack of integrity as he was trying to extend the debate further than it needed to be extended. I will just take it that he did not hear what was being said. So I will accept his apology. Thank you very much Mark Mitchell for the apology and I move on back to the bill. There is not as I said much else to be said. I just want to say that Labour does support this bill. I acknowledge all of those on the Government Administration Committee who have worked hard on this bill and all of those involved in the trust who have done a great deal of work to bring us to the point that we are at now. Thank you very much.
Mitchell Clayton: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Anzac Day Trading Hours for Licensed RNZRSA Clubs) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Clayton: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Anzac Day Trading Hours for Licensed RNZRSA Clubs) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10264. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First): This bill has certainly been speedily expedited through the House today and for good reason. There are occasions where we feel the need to put things through rather quickly.I just want to point out to the people in the House and people at home that there is a large number of New Zealanders who actually believe that Anzac Day is the one true public holiday that should be hero-ed about all others. There are some different faiths backgrounds and religions that have apathetic approaches to other days we put down as special days for trading etc. but Anzac Day is a day that really does represent our history and to acknowledge that history and the tradition of Anzac Day that goes on and follows it—this bill actually allows that to continue.Actually it gets into the enablement of a celebration of life and of the sacrifices made by our returned service people. Of course those people who are currently in that situation are now supporting our country’s position both nationally and internationally with our navy our very small air force and of course our army. So for that reason I think this bill goes a long way and certainly to speed this through the House today makes good sense.We have said before—in fact in August of last year when we were talking about the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Rugby World Cup 2015 Extended Trading Hours) Amendment Act—that we need to get this legislation in its entirety back into the House for discussion and we find ourselves 7 months later having the same discussion writing more little wee codicils and more little wee additions into a piece of legislation that is clearly not fit for purpose. We hope that the Government hears that message loud and clear and we hope that it actually does something about it as we move forward.We really have not a lot else to add to this except to say that New Zealand First does support this bill fully. We look forward to having an Anzac Day of celebration. We hope that the weather is good. It is a hundred years since the establishment of our local RSAs and I hope that everybody continues to drink responsibly and celebrate the day as it was designed to be not just this year but also in hundreds of years to come for the people who have given their service to this country. Thank you.Bill read a third time.
Hipkins Chris: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Anzac Day Trading Hours for Licensed RNZRSA Clubs) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Anzac Day Trading Hours for Licensed RNZRSA Clubs) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10263. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka): Can I join Paul Foster-Bell in making a brief contribution in this third reading debate to commend the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Anzac Day Trading Hours for Licensed RNZRSA Clubs) Amendment Bill to the House. Like Paul Foster-Bell when Anzac Day rolls round I too think of the people who have come before me in my family who have made contributions in those many battles that he mentioned. When I walk into some of the RSAs in my electorate and in fact around the country I reflect on the enormous contribution that those previous war generations have made to the building of this country. They went off to war and in many cases they then came back and they continued to work hard for the betterment of this society. They built the RSAs and it is those very RSAs that we are now working here in the House to protect and to defend their right to hold their Anzac Day commemorations in the way that they always have. So I think it is appropriate that we do so in this House. I think it is appropriate that we do so in the spirit of bipartisanship that we have seen around the House today. I simply commend this bill to the House.
Foster-Bell Paul: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Anzac Day Trading Hours for Licensed RNZRSA Clubs) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Anzac Day Trading Hours for Licensed RNZRSA Clubs) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10263. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): Tēnā koe e Te Mana Wakawā. I move That the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Anzac Day Trading Hours for Licensed RNZRSA Clubs) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. In seeking to have this legislation passed I would like to remember my grandfather Thomas Gordon Bell who served in the Home Guard during the war. As a farmer he was considered unavailable to go off to serve overseas but he did his duty by protecting the shoreline of New Zealand from the threat—the very real threat—of attack from Japan. I would like to remember my great-uncleLeonard Bell who went off to the deserts of North Africa in the Second World War and saw some horrendous things there. He was fortunate enough to survive the battles returned to New Zealand and lived a long life here and was a lifetime member of the RSA. I would like to remember my great-great-grandfather Ayers Robert Foster whose name I bear who served in the First World War in a number of theatres.Hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders over the course of the last century have sacrificed much often their lives so that we can live free in this country. This legislation is the very least that we can do for the organisation that represents the interests of those veterans the Royal New Zealand Returned and Services’ Association in this its centennial year. So not wanting to prolong this debate any further I commend this bill to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Exemption for RNZRSA Clubs from Special Licencing Requirements for Anzac Day) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Exemption for RNZRSA Clubs from Special Licencing Requirements for Anzac Day) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10262. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): We move to Clayton Mitchell’s amendment to clause 1 as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 170. This is now out of order as it is inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.Clause 1 as amended agreed to.Clause 2 agreed to.Clause 3 agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 168 in the name of Paul Foster-Bell to clause 4 be agreed to.Amendment agreed to.Clause 4 as amended agreed to.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.
Foster-Bell Paul: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Exemption for RNZRSA Clubs from Special Licencing Requirements for Anzac Day) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Exemption for RNZRSA Clubs from Special Licencing Requirements for Anzac Day) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10260. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): I move That the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Exemption for RNZRSA Clubs from Special Licencing Requirements for Anzac Day) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Bill read a second time.
Seymour David: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Exemption for RNZRSA Clubs from Special Licencing Requirements for Anzac Day) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSeymour David: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Exemption for RNZRSA Clubs from Special Licencing Requirements for Anzac Day) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10259. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Here is how one gives a short speech. I support the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Exemption for RNZRSA Clubs from Special Licencing Requirements for Anzac Day) Amendment Bill. I congratulate the member in charge of it Paul Foster-Bell. I comport with my colleagues who raised questions about why it is necessary to be in the House amending the legislation for the second time within a year so that normal community activities can be accommodated where a special licence has been inadequate to do so. Finally I believe that these truncated processes although I have supported them in the past are something that we in this House should be very cautious in our use of. Thank you.Bill read a first time.