edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Radhakrishnan PriyancaPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. It's with great pleasure that I rise to take a call on the Criminal Cases Review Commission Bill and also to—I don't know whether it's really to challenge what the previous speaker Lawrence Yule who has just resumed his seat said because parts of it just weren't that clear. It was too much justice"—not sure if he stood against too much justice—"normalising justice" the fact that it was too expensive to get justice. It was completely unclear. He seems to think that this is going to open some sort of a floodgate so that we're going to get too many people who want justice. I'm not sure what exactly his problem is because what this bill does is establish an independent body to review criminal convictions and sentences and decide whether to refer them to an appeal court.It's independent. If this bill passes and this commission is established it will run entirely independently of the Ministry of Justice. Commissioners will be experts in criminal law in other fields. The reason we need this is that there are concerns about the timeliness the quality the fairness and the independence of the current system. That's exactly what this bill is aiming to address. We know there have been high-profile cases as members from this side of the House have spoken about previously that attest to some of these concerns. This commission is a tool to identify and to correct miscarriages of justice when they occur. So I'm not too sure what exactly that member has an issue with.There are tests for referrals as well. There's a whole process that the bill lists in terms of a test for referrals. It doesn't completely replace the Governor-General's powers either; it replaces part of the royal prerogative of mercy. It just replaces the referral power that the Governor-General can currently exercise. That's where the perception of political interference is addressed in terms of this commission as well. So the Governor-General still has the power to grant a full pardon but of course the use of that is quite rare as well.I just want to end actually by quoting the findings that the Minister quoted as well in his first reading speech I think it was. It was the findings of the United Kingdom's House of Commons Justice Committee in assessing the work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission there. It said "If a bolder approach leads to 5 more failed appeals but one additional miscarriage being corrected then that is of clear benefit." I too agree with that sentiment and believe that this bill will enable us to achieve that. I commend this bill to the House."
Huo RaymondCRIMINAL CASES REVIEW COMMISSION BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 18 October.RAYMOND HUO (Labour): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. The bill establishes the independent Criminal Cases Review Commission. The commission's purpose is to review sentences and convictions and decide whether to refer them back to the appeal court. This will replace the power currently exercised by the Governor-General under section 406 of the Crimes Act 1961. Currently someone who has been convicted of an offence and has reasonable grounds to believe that they might have suffered from a miscarriage of justice may apply to the Governor-General to exercise what is known as the royal prerogative of mercy. By convention the Governor-General acts on the formal advice of the Minister of Justice and the work on the prerogative of mercy application is undertaken by lawyers in the Ministry of Justice.Establishing the commission is an opportunity to enhance this system by having an independent review authority with dedicated staff focused on the mandate to identify and respond to any possible miscarriages of justice. I should emphasise that the design of this commission is informed by the core principles underlining the prerogative of mercy and the referral mechanisms exercised by overseas commissions. The statutory grounds or tests for such a referral would be high and the commission will have the power to refer the cases back to the appeal courts. It is not the commission's role to determine guilt or innocence.Comparable jurisdictions notably the United Kingdom and Norway have established similar review commissions. These examples provide a valuable experience for us to draw from. The equivalent review commission in the UK sends about one in 30 cases back to the appeal courts and in New Zealand information released by the Ministry of Justice showed that 11 people and eight cases had been compensated for wrongful conviction since 1998.The New Zealand Bar Association has welcomed the development. They have been advocating for an independent review authority for many years and other experts have said that such a development is long overdue. I commend the bill to the House.
McAnulty KieranKIERAN McANULTY (Labour): Malo ni Mr Assistant Speaker. I waited very patiently yesterday for this opportunity to speak on the Residential Tenancies (Prohibiting Letting Fees) Amendment Bill and I was very disappointed not to get my chance. But you can imagine how delighted I am to speak in favour of this marvellous bill—this bill that will for once and for all level the playing field that has been unfair and discriminatory towards tenants in this country. At a time when tenancies are at an all-time high and homeownership is at an all-time low we have realised that we have an unfair system that allows people to charge letting fees to tenants—letting fees that are not part of a competitive market. There is no incentive to shop around and get the cheapest fare. It is simply the case that when there is so much competition for rental places letting fees can be charged on the tenants at pretty much any rate they like. What this bill is going to do is bring it into a competitive market. The other side of the House believes in market forces. They believe in competitive markets yet what they have done yesterday and today is stand up and argue for the rights of landlords completely dismissing those growing numbers of people in this country that have to rent in order to have a home. This is not a fair situation particularly given the housing crisis that this Government inherited after nine years of National. And what do they do? They sit there and whinge and moan and point fingers and say that this is wrong yet at not one time in all their speeches did they say that they would reverse this bill if they got back into Government in say 15 to 18 years' time because they know that once all this blistering noise has settled down this is a bill that's fair and that will benefit most people and then when they are in Government in a long long time they will not reverse this. But let them whinge. Let them moan. While this Government gets on with helping people and building houses we'll leave them to crumble bridges.
Hayes JoRESIDENTIAL TENANCIES (PROHIBITING LETTING FEES) AMENDMENT BILLSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 24 October.JO HAYES (National): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I'm just going to give a brief summary of what I said last night. I said last night that this is one of the dumbest bills I've ever seen come through this House. It has wasted this House's time and it has done very little to actually keep people safe who are new tenants or prospective new tenants into the future. It's the type of bill that takes a blanket sweep to find and weed out the rogue landlords. They forget that not all landlords are rogue landlords; there are some very good landlords out there and this bill punishes them.It's the type of bill that some people from last night from across the Government said was a very fair bill. Well it's not fair; it's very unfair to tenants and it will open up an ability for additional money to be added to the rentals of the new tenants as landlords and letting agents work to recoup that letting fee loss that they are going to suffer from this particular bill.So what we're going to see is that potentially families aren't going to be able to afford to keep up with the increased rent and they're not going to be able to afford those homes to live in. It's the type of bill where because of rogue landlords it is going to hurt everybody absolutely everybody. It's going to hurt the good landlords it's going to hurt the tenants the prospective tenants and I don't want to see that happen.
Jones Shane; Brownlee GerryAMENDED ANSWERS TO ORAL QUESTIONSQuestion No. 5 to Minister 24 OctoberHon SHANE JONES (Associate Minister of Transport): I seek leave to correct an answer I gave yesterday.SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that? [Interruption] Order! There is no objection.Hon SHANE JONES: Yesterday uncharacteristically I erred. When answering a question on behalf of Minister Phil Twyford I was asked when I became—and I was speaking as if I was him—aware of the Prime Minister's clarification that there would be no additional regional fuel taxes while she was Prime Minister. As I was speaking on behalf of the Minister and not myself the correct answer should have been that I speaking as the Minister was aware of this clarification yesterday morning. It was a matter of mixed personalities.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. A personal explanation is generally to clarify a situation. What's still not clear here is the time line. Now is Mr Jones going to elaborate a little more on that—SPEAKER: No. No he's not. I think he made it clear. Yesterday he said When the Prime Minister said it in here." Now he has said "It was in the morning".Hon Paul Goldsmith: He said "yesterday" Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: Yesterday morning. In fact let's get that absolutely clear now: when he was saying "yesterday" did he mean yesterday or yesterday from yesterday?Hon SHANE JONES (Associate Minister of Transport): For absolute lucidity I am referring to yesterday today being Thursday and the period of time I am referring to is at some point during the course of yesterday's morning.SPEAKER: Thank you. Is that clear now?"
Hipkins Chris; Brownlee GerryTHURSDAY 25 OCTOBER 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Legislation to be considered next week will include the Child Poverty Reduction Bill the Crown Minerals (Petroleum) Amendment Bill the Residential Tenancies (Prohibiting Letting Fees) Amendment Bill the Family and Whānau Violence Legislation Bill and the Taxation (Research and Development Tax Credits) Bill. As notified to the Business Committee there will be an extended sitting on Thursday morning. Wednesday will be a members' day. Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I wonder if the Leader of the House can tell us if it's the Government's intention to advance with some urgency legislation to give effect to the Prime Minister's announcement yesterday with regards to regional fuel tax no longer being Government policy. Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): First of all that wasn't the Prime Minister's announcement yesterday and also there is no need for legislation to give effect to the Prime Minister's commitments yesterday.
Wednesday 24 October 2018 - Volume 734
Commerce Amendment Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Commerce Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 118New Zealand National 55; New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 1ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a third time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 111New Zealand National 55; New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; ACT New Zealand 1.Noes 8Green Party 8.Bill read a third time.
Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
12. Question No. 12—Social DevelopmentWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister for Social DevelopmentQuestion No. 12—Social Development12. WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development: What progress if any has the Government made with the Te Hiku o Te Ika - Crown Social Development and Wellbeing Accord signed in 2013?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): The accord was signed in 2013 and is an agreement between the iwi and Crown agencies to work on solutions to remove disparities and create socio-economic equity for the people. However work languished until June this year when the iwi came to Parliament to meet this Government's Ministers and recommit to the renewed Te Hiku - Crown social accord. Progress has been made. Last week the Ministry of Health and Oranga Tamariki signed agreements with Te Hiku iwi to join the accord and the development of a co-governance model is under way which will focus on the social and economic revitalisation of the rohe.Willow-Jean Prime: How are Te Hiku o Te Ika's priorities for its people in line with this Government's priorities?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The iwi is focused on investing in industries to create sustainable meaningful employment and improve social outcomes for Northland people. This Government has invested $3.5 billion to grow infrastructure and job opportunities in the regions. Northland was one of the first areas the Government invested in. In June the Ministry of Social Development invested $2.5 million into He Poutama Taitamariki a programme providing young Northland people with more meaningful employment pathways and pastoral care. There are signs that this Government's investment in the Northland region is paying off: unemployment dropped to 4.7 percent in the June quarter—that's 2.5 percent lower than in the same period last year.Willow-Jean Prime: How has the dialogue progressed between the iwi and the Crown since the signing of the renewed accord?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Iwi leader Haami Piripi stated publicly that the iwi is 100 percent committed to making sure the social accord succeeds and provides real outcomes for our people that help them raise their children in safe and nurturing homes and improve the quality of their lives. This is what our people expect from us as iwi leaders and this is what we have already agreed with the Government through the Te Hiku social accord. We're looking forward to working seriously with this Government to achieve these outcomes." This Government is committed to doing our part to achieve these outcomes."
11. Question No. 11—JusticeCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville) to the Minister of JusticeQuestion No. 11—Justice11. CHRIS PENK (National—Helensville) to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by all his Government's actions and statements in regards to the Criminal Cases Review Commission Bill?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Justice): Yes.Chris Penk: Does the bill contain any measures to preclude accountability of the commission?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The legislation establishes the Criminal Cases Review Commission as an independent Crown entity. Ultimately it reports on its functions to Parliament in the usual way.Chris Penk: Will the commission decide to refer cases to an appeal court on the basis of consensus or unanimous decision-making or as with the courts majority decision-making?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The legislation is clear that the commission will determine its own decision-making procedures. The way that Criminal Cases Review Commissions operate in other countries is that those designated as commissioners consider the reports put before them following an investigation and they make their decision in the way they choose to decide to refer a matter to the Court of Appeal or not. [Interruption]SPEAKER: No no the member's run out of questions.
9. Question No. 9—EducationJO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 9—Education9. JO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What action if any has the Government taken to increase the supply of teachers for 2019?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): The latest analysis suggests that we'll need around 850 more teachers in classrooms from the beginning of next year. The Government has put in place a number of short-term measures to ensure that we have enough teachers in classrooms next year including recruitment from overseas. I've been advised that 2284 applications have been received through the overseas recruitment process—315 of those have already been assessed as meeting requirements and they have begun the registration process. We are pulling out all of the stops to ensure that we have enough teachers for next year.Jo Luxton: What do schools need to do to take advantage of this pool of teachers available for 2019?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The Government will do everything it can to support schools to recruit teachers to fill any vacancies they have. Of the 315 that have been assessed as ready" to date only 115 of those have been interviewed by schools. My message to schools is that if they are concerned that they are going to have vacancies they cannot fill at the beginning of next year they need to advertise those as quickly as possible and work with the Ministry of Education and the recruitment agencies to ensure that we have people available to fill them.Jo Luxton: What else is the Government doing to increase the supply of teachers for 2019?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Two other notable measures the Government has in place are: fully subsidising the cost of refresher training for teachers whose registration would otherwise lapse—1250 people have been undertaking refresher training as a result of that—and we have also introduced new grants of up to $10000 to support those schools that are taking on teaching graduates so that they get a good start to their teaching careers."
6. Question No. 6—Regional Economic DevelopmentMARK PATTERSON (NZ First) to the Minister for Regional Economic DevelopmentQuestion No. 6—Regional Economic Development6. MARK PATTERSON (NZ First) to the Minister for Regional Economic Development: What reports has he seen recently regarding regional development?Hon SHANE JONES (Minister for Regional Economic Development): It has been brought to my attention that Statistics New Zealand has shown for the first time in eight years that the population has increased in every region. This is after years of neglect and a decrease of numbers in West Coast Manawatū—SPEAKER: Order! Order! Mark Patterson: What regions in particular showed strong population growth? Hon SHANE JONES: Obviously the regions that I'm focused on: Northland Bay of Plenty Manawatū Whanganui—in fact from the rafters of every hall in the country they're happy that the provincial champion's at work.Mark Patterson: Why is this good news for provincial economies and the country? Hon SHANE JONES: Well obviously as a consequence of unfettered immigration enormous pressure has been placed on metropolitan infrastructure and as more people move into the provinces on the back of the investments and the good news that has been spread around the four winds we'll find that we are getting a better level of utilisation from our provincial assets. People can have the option for a greater quality of life and I will continue to lead that charge.
3. Question No. 3—FinanceTAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 3—FinanceTAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki): Thank you Mr Speaker. Malo ni. My question is to—Hon Amy Adams: Tetchy Grant tetchy.SPEAKER: Order! Sorry the member will resume his seat. Who was the member who interjected then—who called out then?Hon Amy Adams: I withdraw and apologise.3. TAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of Finance: What are the most significant investments the Government has made in the past year?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): At the risk of trying your patience the coalition Government has made many significant investments to address the issues that New Zealanders are facing. I cannot go through all of them today but I'd like to just name a few of the highlights: a $5.5 billion Families Package that will see 384000 families better off by an average of $75 per week; a $2 billion investment in KiwiBuild to begin delivering 100000 affordable homes; the restarting of contributions to New Zealand Superannuation Fund after nine years of them being frozen; the billion dollars of the first year of Provincial Growth Fund; a billion dollars for the R & D tax incentive; and much much more. And we've done all of that while maintaining a surplus and keeping debt under control. [Interruption] SPEAKER: Order! We're not performing seals. That's to stop.Tamati Coffey: Why has the Government made these investments?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We've made these investments so that New Zealand families will be better off. They will have more money in their pocket from increases to the family tax credit extensions of Working for Families the Best Start payment and the winter energy payment. They will have an opportunity to achieve the Kiwi dream of homeownership. Wherever they will live they will see economic opportunities thanks to the Provincial Growth Fund. They can have confidence that their schools are being fixed their hospitals are being rebuilt and their transport infrastructure improved. They know that their environment is being looked after through policies like the phasing out of plastic bags and the move to a zero-carbon New Zealand. We came into office and got on with the job from day one. We still have much to do but I am proud to be part of a Government where we are making investments that are about the long-term well-being of all New Zealanders.
O'Connor GregGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu): This will be a very short call and I hope my voice does actually last long enough. This is simply a no-brainer. Take this situation: you've got two houses for rent. As a result of neglect—DEPUTY SPEAKER: I don't. GREG O'CONNOR: —and I have to say an admission by those opposite that we do now have a housing shortage you are likely to get up to a hundred people on each house. Now one of the houses is privately owned by one of those mum and dad investors—that you seem to be so keen on over there—who isn't using an agent—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Don't bring me into it. GREG O'CONNOR: —and the other is using an agent. So the best of the tenants are actually going to win the race to get the tenancy. One of them is going to be punished and the other one won't and that just shows how ridiculous this is. There is only one person who should be paying this fee. It's the one who's going to benefit from it and that is going to be the landlord. It is a no-brainer and I commend this bill to the House.
Radhakrishnan Priyanca; Tolley AnnePRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise with absolute delight to speak to this bill that will ban a practice that is both unfair and arbitrary. This is a bill about fairness. It's about not allowing two parties that contract to then charge a third party. I mean how anyone can stand in this House and say that's fair is beyond belief.Judith Collins stood up previously and talked about private landlords: They're being penalised; they're being demonised"—she said—"by this Government. It's too difficult for landlords." What about renters? Do they not count; or do they have less human rights somehow? This bill actually doesn't affect private landlords—newsflash. It's about letting agents and not allowing them to charge a letting fee even if they then say that costs are passed on to landlords. There are two points I want to make. Landlords can still seek reimbursement for actual costs which are not reflected by letting fees as it stands; secondly even if rents rise we had submitters who were renters who came to the Social Services and Community Committee and told us that they would prefer that as opposed to an upfront cost. So there you go.Two quick points: students told us that they are being charged $1400 just to have two people replaced on a tenancy. How is that fair? Final point: the commencement date that has been changed as a result of the select committee process Louise Upston says that's poor process. It's because tenancy turnover is the highest between November and February. It's about fairness. More people move into tenancies at that period of time and so we want to ensure that we maximise the reduction in costs for them. This is a bill about fairness and I commend it to the House.DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call but I just remind the member to use the full name of other members—so it is the Hon Judith Collins. I call Dan Bidois."
Curran ClareHon CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South): Well Madam Deputy Speaker as one of those people as Judith Collins referred to me—and I must say she's looking very pleased with herself tonight—I find it deeply ironic that she spent a lot of her speech talking about humanising landlords while from the other side of her mouth or out of her keyboard this afternoon came the demonising of people who live in State housing because apparently they're people that regular people don't want to live next to. If there's around half of New Zealand who live in rental housing then that's a lot of people who are affected and a big percentage of those people really struggle when they need to move house when they're looking for a house and they are being penalised by letting fees. This is one small step—one small step to try to make it easier for people to be able to afford a home to be able to afford a home that they can afford and it's about fairness. This is a bill which is small. It fits into a much bigger strategy which National clearly opposes on principle around affordable homes for everyone in New Zealand. Landlords are a really important part of our ecosystem. There are a lot of landlords in New Zealand and many and most of them are doing a good job. But not all of them and there are intermediaries that charge very high letting fees. This bill attempts to address that. It's fair it's about ensuring that people can afford to rent and we support it.
Dyson RuthHon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills): It's a real delight to be able to speak in the third reading of this legislation although I must say that watching the response of the member for Epsom to Andrew Bayly the previous speaker I was very tempted to see if he wanted to have another go because I would have been prepared to split my 10 minutes in order to listen to his contribution to this debate once more. The three—David Seymour: Please tell us the member's not going to use 10 minutes.Hon RUTH DYSON: I was thinking of going for longer if it's possible. I was—David Seymour: Thank God for the Standing Orders!Hon RUTH DYSON: Ha ha! Thank you for your contribution Mr Seymour. It's always appreciated. It adds life to the House.So there are three parts to this bill. The first is as has been the focus of the third reading debate the market studies issue—or as they're referred to in the bill competition studies—the second one is the regulation of specified airport services and the third one is enforceable undertakings so alternative enforcement mechanisms.I want to commend the former Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs the Hon Jacqui Dean for her work in this area and I want to commend the current Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs the Hon Kris Faafoi for his continuation of that work. It's interesting when we have an area where there seems to be such hot debate between National and Labour on these issues that you've had two Ministers both working on the same areas and there seem to be very little points of difference.It was confusing listening to the National Party members' contributions. They were all over the place desperate to find something to pick holes in in the Government and actually making fools of themselves by attacking legislation that they are then going to vote for. So they need to get a little bit more of a grip on the issues that are before the House.It is our view on this side of the House that consumers should be at the heart of competition and consumer policy. This bill progresses that ambition. It does give us the security that we need. There will be parts of it that will need to be refined in the future and I hope we see the continued efforts such as were demonstrated at the Transport and Infrastructure Committee to make New Zealand a better place for all consumers. Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker.
Finlayson ChristopherHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National): I just want briefly to take a call to talk about the cease and desist provisions because when I was in private practice I remember doing some work on those provisions. Everyone hoped that they would be a very effective jurisdiction but as the Minister Carmel Sepuloni said in her third reading speech on behalf of Mr Faafoi they have largely been useless and indeed she rightly pointed out that Mr Stapleton the first Cease and Desist Commissioner only issued one such order. So it hasn't been a jurisdiction that's been particularly successful and I think that parties that have been desirous of urgent injunctive relief have found it more effective to go straight to the courts for interim relief. That is why on that aspect at least the National Party supports the removal of the cease and desist provisions because they are of very little practical effect at all.The other aspects of the bill—and this will be for the benefit of the member for Mt Roskill who was speaking immediately before me and will be a reasonably subtle speech—is that we need to look very closely at the market studies regime. The point of difference between the National Party and the Labour-led Government was that there was some concern about who would initiate the market studies. But there's no doubt at all that some kind of market studies power is necessary and that the Commerce Commission properly advised would be able to undertake a very careful study of a particular market like the petroleum market.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I apologise for interrupting the member but it has come time for me to leave the chair for the dinner break.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Wood MichaelMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): I'm very happy to speak in favour of the Commerce Amendment Bill. I'll start by acknowledging the previous speaker the Hon Judith Collins. She was actually quite a good Minister of Energy and Resources after years of lethargy from the previous Government. In the final year she did initiate a fuel market study—Hon Christopher Finlayson: Was she a predecessor or a successor?MICHAEL WOOD: —to look—well she was certainly better than her predecessor. I don't think she's quite as good as her successor but she did a good job for a National Party Minister in that role and I want to acknowledge her for that.She also gave a pretty good and measured speech in which she spoke about many of her experiences and gave some insights. The last minute or two got a little bit ungracious and it was a little bit lacking in terms of some of the facts but there was one important thing that she missed in the course of the whole entire 10-minute speech—and it's important to check this—and that is to confirm what the National Party's position on this bill is.It's a little bit of a mystery to many of us. I have in my notes here and from my time on the Transport and Infrastructure Committee the minority view from the National Party which said that they oppose the bill. I listened to the National Party speeches for most of the second reading and most of them spoke as though they opposed the bill but at least one of their senior members said that they were in favour of it. I missed the way that the actual vote went at that stage. From the Hon Judith Collins' speech today we're actually none the wiser. So we'll look on with great interest to see which way the National Party actually chooses to vote at the end of this. It will be an interesting observation to make if they do vote in favour of this bill having written a minority view against it at the select committee stage. One can speculate on what the reasons for that might be.Hon Christopher Finlayson: We're too subtle for you.MICHAEL WOOD: Certainly too something Mr Finlayson. I'm obviously speaking in favour of this bill and that is because the coalition Government stands in favour of fair competition fair rights a fair go for Kiwi consumers and a level playing field for good businesses and that ultimately is what this bill is about because abuse of market position undercuts all of those things. This is an excellent bill. The changes that it makes to market studies forceful undertakings and specified airport services will serve those ends. I commend it to the House. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker.
Speaker's Observations — Debating Chamber—100th Anniversary
Mallard TrevorWEDNESDAY 24 OCTOBER 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.SPEAKER'S OBSERVATIONSDebating Chamber—100th AnniversarySPEAKER: Members on 24 October 1918 the House first sat in the Chamber of the new Parliament buildings. Hansard Volume 183 page 3 reports that the then Prime Minister the Rt Hon William Massey said Sir in moving the adjournment I desire to take the opportunity of congratulating you and also my fellow-members of the House upon our being able to occupy the new parliamentary chamber this session. No doubt we shall have to put up with a certain amount of inconvenience but the fact of our being here to-day is a promise of better things in the future and I have no doubt that promise will be kept. It will of course be in the minds of honourable members that the chamber in which we have met this afternoon will in all probability be the principal legislative chamber of the Dominion for long after the present generation has passed away—perhaps for centuries to come—and I hope that within its walls legislation will be framed which will be for the good government of the Dominion which will mete out just and equal treatment for and between different classes of the community and which will encourage national sentiment and national ideas [that] will tend to make this country honoured and respected not only [with] the British Empire but among the whole of the nations of the world. Sir I move the adjournment of the House."I was sad for myself; I think it's a real pity that they didn't actually finish the job."
Wednesday 7 November 2018 - Volume 734
Crown Minerals (Petroleum) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That Crown Minerals (Petroleum) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a third time.
12. Question No. 12—RevenueDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of RevenueQuestion No. 12—Revenue12. Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of Revenue: How is the Government enabling improvements in the way New Zealanders interact with the revenue system?Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Revenue): This week the IRD launched a major public information campaign to tell New Zealanders about the biggest changes to the tax system in a generation and what it will mean for them. Just one example: we are taking legislation through the House that will remove secondary tax codes and provide automatic refunds for 1.6 million New Zealanders. IRD's online services are being significantly redesigned to make it easier for its 2.9 million users including businesses who will be able to file all their returns online.Dr Deborah Russell: How will the improvements to the tax system that are being implemented through the IRD business transformation programme benefit families and low-income earners?Hon STUART NASH: Because of better information. Of the 1.6 million Kiwis who'll get an automatic refund around 530000 individuals are beneficiaries or people who earn less than the minimum wage and who have never applied for a tax refund before even though they may have been eligible for one. IRD will also be able to proactively manage and adjust entitlements for 330000 Working for Families customers so that they are always getting the right amount and don't have a tax debt at the end of the year. Making sure families get what they're entitled to and ensuring that individuals are not over-taxed will help improve the well-being of New Zealanders and their families.Dr Deborah Russell: How is the Government ensuring that taxpayers who work a second or third job are not being over-taxed?Hon STUART NASH: From April 2019 IRD will be receiving salary and other information faster and more frequently. We are proposing that for those Kiwis who work a second or third job which we know is generally out of need rather than want they will no longer have the burden of secondary tax. I am disappointed that the Opposition who are against that bill want to stand in the way of good hard-working Kiwis getting their refunds faster.
9. Question No. 9—HealthGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 9—Health9. GREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu) to the Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made about the new Wellington Children's Hospital?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Health): Earlier today I visited Wellington Hospital for a mauri stone laying ceremony to mark the start of construction for the new children's hospital. As members may already know this project has benefited from a substantial donation of $50 million from businessman Mark Dunajtschik and I want to put on record once again the Government's thanks for his incredible generosity. Today I've announced that the Government is also committing $45.6 million to the project to build the new Wellington Children's Hospital. This is a great investment in the health and well-being of future generations.Greg O'Connor: How will the new Wellington Children's Hospital benefit patients family and staff?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The current children's hospital is almost 30 years old and has services located around different parts of the regional hospital. This is not ideal for children or families who are already going through a stressful time nor for hospital staff who want to provide the best service for their patients. This new purpose-built hospital with state-of-the-art equipment will provide these services under one roof. It's been designed with children and their whānau at the centre and will make it easier for hospital staff to provide the high-quality care they are so committed to delivering.Greg O'Connor: When will the new Wellington Children's Hospital be completed?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: This is a major project. The new hospital will be spread across three floors and will have 50 beds and 21 clinic rooms. It will feature more single bedrooms but also—SPEAKER: Order! Order! Please answer the question. It's a very simple question.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: To get to the point of the question I'm advised it will be ready to open in 2021.
8. Question No. 8—TransportHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of TransportQuestion No. 8—Transport8. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by all of his Government's policies and actions in relation to the transport portfolio?Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Transport): Yes.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Is he still committed to a light-rail link from the CBD to Auckland Airport and if so has a detailed business case been completed?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The detailed business case is currently being completed by the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA).Hon Paul Goldsmith: Is he still committed to a light-rail link from the CBD to Auckland Airport?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Yes.Hon Paul Goldsmith: If the analysis showed that it would be much cheaper and more effective to connect the airport to the current rail system at Puhinui station would he consider it?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I agree with the analysis that's been done by Auckland Transport by NZTA and the Ministry of Transport under the former Government when Simon Bridges was the transport Minister that light rail is the most appropriate mode to deliver a rapid transit service between the central city and the airport precinct.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he agree with his colleague Shane Jones' statement to One News that the Marsden Point rail spur is a done deal" and that construction is beginning; and if so has a business case been completed?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The business case on that excellent project is currently under way but I think it's an excellent idea and I agree with my colleague the Hon Shane Jones."
6. Question No. 6—Social DevelopmentPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) to the Minister for Social DevelopmentQuestion No. 6—Social Development6. PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she recently made regarding family violence funding?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): I was pleased to announce today at the National Collective of Independent Women's Refuges AGM that the Government is investing $15.379 million from Budget 2018 into whānau resilience services. These will provide long-term support beyond our current crisis support services for families who have experienced violence and will be developed in partnership with communities whānau and providers. This reflects the Ministry of Social Development's commitment to kotahitanga partnering for greater impact reflecting that we are stronger when we work together.Priyanca Radhakrishnan: Why do we need these new whānau resilience services?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The majority of family violence providers have said that because most providers are funded for the short-term crisis period they do not have the capacity to work with whānau to break intergenerational cycles of violence. Providers have told us that they have seen the same clients over and over again and are now seeing some of the children and grandchildren of these clients. These new whānau resilience services will provide an opportunity for providers to walk alongside these families for up to three years so they can support them toward better long-term outcomes. The sector has welcomed this announcement and the opportunity to provide the best possible services for families in their communities.Priyanca Radhakrishnan: What will be different about the whānau resilience services?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Whānau resilience services will be a whole new approach to getting the right outcomes and breaking down cycles of violence. We know that different communities and families have different needs so we want to ensure that service providers have the flexibility and security to be able to provide the right support for everyone who comes through the door. Whānau resilience services will be about providing localised solutions and building resilience in our whānau and communities so that together we can make a difference in the lives of our whānau and our tamariki.
3. Question No. 3—FinanceWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 3—Finance3. WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What recent announcements has he made about Budget 2019?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): As widely signalled Budget 2019 will be New Zealand's first well-being Budget. We have identified five core priorities that will define this Budget. They cover the areas where we think the outcomes will make a substantive difference to both our current and future well-being. One of these will be mental health. This coalition will finally be giving mental health the priority and focus it deserves. This will see my ministerial colleagues working together to produce initiatives that are squarely focused on long-term intergenerational improvements in mental health.Willow-Jean Prime: Why has the Government made mental health a priority?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We can no longer track our success as a country on just a narrow measure such as GDP growth. We are moving beyond GDP to look not just at our financial health but also the well-being of our people the health of our environment and the strength of our communities. Mental health is an obvious example of an issue that has a significant say in our overall well-being. What makes our approach to addressing it different is that by making it an overall priority for the Budget all Ministers and agencies are expected to identify how they can contribute to it. We will be breaking down the silos of Government and finding a new way of working which will see for example education justice health and other areas working together for long-term mental health outcomes.Willow-Jean Prime: What are the other Budget priorities?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The full detail of our Budget priorities will be revealed during the Budget Policy Statement on 13 December. They will include sustainably growing and modernising our economy lifting children's well-being and as I've already said giving mental health the focus that it needs. I can also assure the House that as part of our well-being Budget I will still keep a close eye on our finances and a steady hand on the economic wheel. We owe that to future generations but we also owe to them and to all of our communities the chance to live fulfilling and meaningful lives and to be valued more than just as numbers on a balance sheet.
Pugh Maureen; Tolley AnneMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I too tonight take a very short call on this Earthquake Commission Amendment Bill in its second reading. As has been traversed tonight this bill is including some of the content of a discussion document that was actually released in 2015 and—DEPUTY SPEAKER: I'm very sorry to interrupt the member.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 10 p.m.
Dyson RuthHon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills): What a sad way to end what has otherwise been an incredibly positive debate on an issue that there's clear agreement on. I want to say to the junior whip for the National Party that he's part of the Canterbury team that understands not just why this is needed but why a much more comprehensive review of the operation and the scope of the Earthquake Commission is needed.This is a great start. I'm delighted that it's received such rigorous attention from the Finance and Expenditure Committee. It's come back in very good shape. I was a bit disappointed that the Hon Nicky Wagner said it wasn't going far enough because we've had all those opportunities but I certainly look forward to this legislation being well-supported and being implemented. It will be of great benefit to the people who need cover in the situations such as we've found ourselves in in Canterbury.
McAnulty Kieran; Tolley AnneKIERAN McANULTY (Junior Whip—Labour): It's been a long day—it's 9.58 p.m.—and therefore I seek leave for the House to rise early.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well leave is sought; I'll put the leave. Does anyone object to that? There is objection.
Hayes JoJO HAYES (National): Thank you. It is my pleasure to stand and speak on the Earthquake Commission Amendment Bill a bill that is a good first-steps type of bill. As my colleagues have already traversed quite a lot of the area that I wanted to talk on I just want to acknowledge the people of Canterbury and the devastation that happened through the Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 and also the people from Kaikōura. I think that as I said this is a really good first-steps bill. There are as the Hon Nicky Wagner said a few other areas that could have been included in this bill around the points—the hard parts around the role of the Earthquake Commission. I think they did a grand job and this bill will actually help hopefully to improve the way that they deliver their services to the people of Aotearoa New Zealand.I too like the previous speakers will be short with my delivery with my contribution tonight because I think that there are so many people out there who are waiting for this bill to receive its Royal assent and I'm not going to stand in the way of that. So I'm very privileged and proud to commend it to the House. Thank you.