edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
7. Schools—Christchurch Schools Rebuild Funding and Redcliffs SchoolHon NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) to the Minister of EducationSchools—Christchurch Schools Rebuild Funding and Redcliffs School7. Hon NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) to the Minister of Education: Does he stand by his reported comments that he only found out in October last year that the $1.13 billion Christchurch Schools Rebuild programme was funded over successive years?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): I stand by my actual statement that combined with the need to fund roll growth urgent repair work and there being no money left in the kitty to finish the Christchurch Schools Rebuild programme we're facing a whopping $1.1 billion hole over the next four years and that is what I was alerted to upon becoming a Minister.Hon Nikki Kaye: When did he know about the existing Canterbury school rebuild programme being appropriated on a yearly basis and why didn't he include it in Labour's fiscal costings before the election?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The member didn't listen to my first answer. I knew about that when the Government announced it at the time because I criticised their decision not to appropriate the funding for their commitment at the time and it was included in our pre-election plans.Hon Nikki Kaye: Is he saying that the Christchurch Press was wrong when they reported him and his press statement saying that it was a hole when he is now saying that he did know about the Canterbury school rebuild and the existing funding that was to be appropriated? Who's wrong: the Christchurch Press or him?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The member clearly didn't listen to my answer to the primary question. It was a reported comment not a direct quote.Hon Ruth Dyson: Has he seen any reports recently in relation to Christchurch schools; and if so what did they say?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes indeed I have. Just this week I've seen a report that advised of the excellent decision by the Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration to use the special powers of her portfolio to fast track the return of Redcliffs School to its community. The school's been operating out of its community since June 2011 and were threatened with closure previously. It's great news that it's now returning to Redcliffs and I am reliably informed that the school is ready to return.Hon Nikki Kaye: Why won't he admit that he is classifying business-as-usual property spend and existing programmes like the rebuild for Canterbury as holes to cover up his negligence for either not including them in his costings or justifying why he won't be able to deliver his education promises?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: What was negligent was leaving a $1.1 billion capital deficit in the education budget—17000 additional students who wouldn't have a classroom or a school to go to if this Government didn't pick up the pieces left behind by the previous administration.
3. Fiscal Strategy—Capital InvestmentVIRGINIA ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceFiscal Strategy—Capital Investment3. VIRGINIA ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What capital investment needs has he been made aware of ahead of Budget 2018?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): In the build-up to Budget 2018 I've been made aware of the scale of capital investment needs we've inherited. Treasury reports that our district health boards will require $10 billion worth of Crown investment over the next 10 years. We've also inherited issues in the education portfolio where a further $1.1 billion is needed over the next four years to pay for school roll growth. We've also had to make up for the $9.7 billion shortfall in the Auckland Transport Alignment Project. Fortunately as I announced in a speech this morning the Government's net capital spending will total $42 billion over the next five years—that is $10 billion more than the five-year forecast by the previous Government before the election. We are committed to fixing the foundations of our communities country and economy.Virginia Andersen: What has the Government done so far to address capital investment needs? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We've already made a significant difference with our 100-day plan. As part of last year's mini-Budget we allocated major capital investments that will make a long-term difference to the lives of New Zealanders. This included the $2 billion for our KiwiBuild project and we have also restarted contributions to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund after nine years of no Government contributions. This is crucial for us to safeguard superannuation for future generations.Virginia Andersen: How is the Government funding these investments?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We've taken a number of actions to ensure that we can afford all of our much-needed capital commitments. Firstly we reversed the previous Government's poorly targeted tax cuts which would have disproportionately benefited the wealthiest. We're also taking a more responsible debt repayment track giving ourselves headroom to make these essential investments. And we have been able to reprioritise around $700 million of funding over the next four years by repurposing spending that does not fit with our Government's plans or does not represent value for money. We also have a growing economy that is contributing to our resources. These actions have allowed us to free up resources so we can correct the social and infrastructure deficits we've inherited. You will see this reflected in the Budget when it is announced in a week today.
Sepuloni CarmelHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): Just to respond to the last two speakers can I just say with regards to the advocacy role there's no intention to reallocate that. We like to think that as a Government we're going to advocate quite adequately for families and the well-being of New Zealanders across Government agencies.I also just want to go back and acknowledge Maureen Pugh the speaker who just spoke for paying her respects to those who have actually been in charge of the Families Commission and who have been on the board of the Families Commission. Just reflecting on the member who spoke prior to her the Hon Judith Collins who seemed to be slightly negative about the people that have headed the Families Commission—and I do want to remind this committee with that in mind that one of our own members Parmjeet Parmar was appointed by the National Government to be the head of the Families Commission in 2013. So we do pay our respects to all those that have been involved with the running and the governance of the Families Commission.
Sepuloni CarmelHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): I'll just quickly respond to a few of the questions asked by the Hon Alfred Ngaro and then allow someone else to take a call. This is pretty straightforward. The honourable member Alfred Ngaro has asked why we didn't take this out why we didn't do a review why we haven't consulted widely and why we haven't had an inquiry. Well the number one reason is because every political party in the House agreed with this. We need to keep in mind here that this was well under way before the current Government took office. It was actually instigated by the previous Government. The previous Government had set a schedule for when they expected it to be disestablished which is 30 June which is what we've continued with and which is what you will see in this bill. The member has asked why there's no regulatory impact statement. It's because the advice that we received from Treasury was that none was required because this is so straightforward. And the member has asked why I've changed my position from I think maybe—I don't know how long it was; I can't remember the date that the member stated. But really the reason was that when looking at this it's very clear to all of us in the House that at the time the Families Commission was set up in 2004 it was a very different social context. What we've got now in particular is a better understanding of the diversity of New Zealand families and of the drivers of families and well-being. We've also got heightened expectations that agencies will work with each other on investing for social well-being and I'll also say that what we've also got now most significantly is a Government with a clear focus on improving the well-being of New Zealanders hence why there is no longer a requirement for a Families Commission. But I do want to remind the House that this is straightforward. Every party in this House supports this bill. So I think it's important that we do analyse any areas that might genuinely be of concern but that that really be where the focus is. Thank you.
Allan Kiritapu; Williams PotoFAMILIES COMMISSION ACT REPEAL BILLIn CommitteeKIRITAPU ALLAN (Assistant Whip—Labour): I seek leave for the provisions to be taken as one debate.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
Ngā Rohe Moana o Ngā Hapū o Ngāti Porou Bill (No 2) — First Reading
Young JonathanJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): Thank you sir. E ngā mana e ngā reo e ngā hau e whā tēnā koutou tēnā koutou tēnā koutou katoa. Can I just say thank you to the previous speaker. There are occasions when listening to him is helpful and I certainly appreciated his comments and insights into the challenges that we face as a nation. Perhaps in time he will speak fondly of the slings and arrows that come from the National Party as he did so admirably say regarding Ngāti Porou's leadership.Here we are in a momentous point in time as we look at the first reading of the Ngā Rohe Moana o Ngā Hapū o Ngāti Porou Bill (No 2). I'm very happy to stand in support of this from the National Party's benches and to acknowledge the Hon Chris Finlayson for the outstanding work he has led over close to near a decade. I acknowledge also the Hon Andrew Little and the work he has continued on. Indeed these pieces of legislation are more than just words on paper. They are history they are the story they are the mana of the people of Ngāti Porou and as the Hon Shane Jones mentioned this is very important in terms of going forward for the success of people in Aotearoa New Zealand.We need to look at the future together and with unified thinking towards the strong challenges that face us. As this bill progresses through Parliament and through the select committee process I am just acknowledging my colleague the Hon Anne Tolley. What she says is so important: that New Zealanders do not see this as something which they react against but that they support because they are supporting the tangata whenua the people who this bill speaks of in terms of their connection to their rohe and how important that is for their mana and their future and their sense of well-being and progress.There is a tremendous amount of detail in this bill but can I say from the far shores of Taranaki that we wish you every success in this and we wish the speedy progress of this bill. It has been some time and we indeed hope that we can be here to celebrate on the third and final reading of this and see the great celebration that you look for in terms of the sense of mana as I said and well-being of your people. Tēnā koutou tēnā koutou tēnā koutou katoa.
Hipkins Chris; Brownlee GerryTHURSDAY 10 MAY 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Next week the Government will present its first Budget. On Tuesday 15 May the House will consider the third readings of the Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill and the Families Commission Act Repeal Bill and the committee stage of the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill. Wednesday 16 May is a members' day. Thursday 17 May is Budget day. The Minister of Finance will deliver the Budget speech soon after 2 p.m. The start of the 15-hour Budget debate will follow. I expect the House to rise at 6 p.m. and the Budget debate will resume on Tuesday 22 May.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): Just seeking some clarification. So we accept that the Budget is delivered next week. We've read the publicity about the Budget but there's nothing in the Budget that is all that urgent.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): It was very clear from my statement that there would not be urgency after the Budget. I did go back and look at the precedent regarding this and noted that previous Governments over the last nine years typically did do urgency after the Budget largely to hike up taxes and levies.
Wednesday 9 May 2018 - Volume 729
Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill — In Committee
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 24 in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters to Part 2 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Part 2 as amended agreed to.
12. Māori Language / Te Reo—Government Support Maihi Karauna Strategy and ReportsNUK KORAKO (National) to the Minister for Māori DevelopmentMāori Language / Te Reo—Government Support Maihi Karauna Strategy and Reports12. NUK KORAKO (National) to the Minister for Māori Development: What recent reports has she seen from the Māori Language Commission on the importance of expanding te reo Māori?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister for Māori Development): I whiwhi i te ripoata nā Te Taura Whiri i Te Reo e aro ana ki te wā e mea atu kia haruru a Aotearoa whānui i tō tātau reo taketake arā [The report was received from the Māori Language Commission in regards to the moment namely saying] all New Zealand will resonate with our indigenous language.Nuk Korako: Ā e te huanga hoki ki ahau nei nā wai ka ia ai urupare ki te pātai me te whāia nui rānei ki te whakaturinga Te Reo he māngai ia mō Te Kāwanatataka kāore rānei?[And also to the relative to me who indeed is she responding to the question and the main aim or turning a deaf ear to the language is she a representative for the Government or not?]Hon Kelvin Davis: Anō?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Āe.Mehemea ka tīkina e au te wairua o tērā kōrero ā ka hangaia e Te Kāwanatanga Te Maihi Karauna mā ngā kāhui minita e aro atu hei rautaki mō ā mātau nei mahi kei Te Kāwanatanga.[Yes.If I take the spirituality of that statement aboard the Government will create the Maihi Karauna strategy for the ministerial clusters to take into account in terms of their responsibilities that the Government has for them.]Rino Tirikatene: What work has been done on the development of the Maihi Karauna the Crown's Māori language strategy?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Te Māngai Pāho Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori Māori Television and Te Puni Kōkiri have worked very hard to complete the Maihi Karauna strategy which was actually mandated by the previous Government to guide the work of this Government as we seek to ensure that Reo revitalisation is something that all New Zealanders will benefit from.Nuk Korako: Pātai anō.SPEAKER: No no the time for oral questions has concluded. There are no supplementaries left to the member.
11. Health Services—Newborn Enrolment with a General PracticeDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National) to the Minister of HealthHealth Services—Newborn Enrolment with a General Practice11. Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National) to the Minister of Health: Does he support the enrolment of newborns with GPs before they are 6 weeks old?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Health): I want parents to have a simple process to ensure newborns get the care they need including a GP practice a Well Child provider being on the immunisation register and a dental programme.Dr Parmjeet Parmar: Can he then ensure that he will not vote against my bill the Newborn Enrolment with General Practice Bill and then in order to get political mileage steal the concept of my bill and use it as part of a Government bill?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Legislation is not the answer. If it was I'm sure the previous Government would've acted on it.
10. Police—Increase in Front-line Officers and Sworn StaffCHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South) to the Minister of PolicePolice—Increase in Front-line Officers and Sworn Staff10. CHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South) to the Minister of Police: From what date will he start to count the extra 1800 sworn police officers that he says he is striving towards hiring?Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): From the date this Government took office.Chris Bishop: Can he confirm then that he'll be including the extra 880 sworn police funded through Budget 2017 as part of his extra 1800 sworn police?Hon STUART NASH: Mr Bishop I'll take your 880 and I'll up them 920 which equals 1800 which is 1800 more than your Government delivered over seven years.Chris Bishop: How many of the extra 1800 sworn police officers will be able to respond to family violence call outs?Hon STUART NASH: That is a very good point Mr Bishop and it's one of the reasons why of the 1800 we're putting around about 1100 into the front-line community positions because we recognise that family harm and family violence is the scourge of our communities and we really want to deal with it. We think that a really good way to deal with it is to have police officers located in our communities. But having said that all 1800 work in the front line. [Interruption] SPEAKER: Order! I do want to remind the Leader of the Opposition that my mike is open and when he refers to members inappropriately in the second person everyone hears it. I didn't stop him in any of the four times that he did it during that answer but I will ask him just to take some care.
9. Mycoplasma Bovis—CompensationHon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister for BiosecurityMycoplasma Bovis—Compensation9. Hon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister for Biosecurity: Does he stand by all his statements and actions in relation to Mycoplasma bovis?Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister for Biosecurity): Yes.Lawrence Yule: What does he say to the White family in Pātoka Hawke's Bay who've had 900 cattle killed and are still waiting for compensation and as a result they can't afford to buy their children's rugby boots or replace their washing machine?Rt Hon Winston Peters: Ask Nathan Guy.Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: I have sympathy for every farmer who's in any way affected by this Mycoplasma bovis outbreak. Can I say that by the end of today 80 percent of all claims made to the Ministry for Primary Industries will be paid out. I can also say that if his colleague Mr Guy had moved more quickly when we first discovered Mycoplasma bovis this wouldn't be happening.Hon Nathan Guy: Why doesn't he direct his officials to provide a letter of intent to banks notifying them that compensation is on the way to stop them pressuring nearly bankrupt farmers who are still waiting for terribly slow compensation payments?Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Can I repeat for that member: by the end of today 80 percent of all claims made will be paid out. This is not a simple process. Can I take for example one claim where the number of animals in the yard the number of animals put on to the truck and then the number of animals killed at the stock works were completely different. There's a lot of confusing information that has to be sorted through to ensure that the right payment goes to the farmers. In regards to the banks the banks understand the situation. Wherever there has been a request for further information regarding compensation payments we have delivered.
5. Budget Policy Statement—Capital Allowances Increased Spending Allowances and Operating AllowancesKIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceBudget Policy Statement—Capital Allowances Increased Spending Allowances and Operating Allowances5. KIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What were the operating and capital allowances in the Budget Policy Statement 2018 and how do these compare with previous periods?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): In the Budget Policy Statement that this Government released in December last year we allocated for 2018-19 $2.6 billion of new operating allowances and $3.4 billion of capital allowances. This compares to the pre-election fiscal update which had $1.8 billion in new operating allowances for 2018-19 and $2 billion on capital. Final allowances for Budget 2018 will be outlined next Thursday.Kiritapu Allan: What priorities has this Government signalled for these increased spending allowances?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We have made rebuilding our critical public services lifting children out of poverty strengthening economic development in our regions and better managing our natural resources as top priorities. Every New Zealander knows a story of how the services and infrastructure that we rely on have been run down in recent years. Just today a group of health professionals delivered the stories of thousands of New Zealanders to us which outlined the pressure that an underfunded health system has put on them. This is why we need these increased spending allowances.Kiritapu Allan: What impact would lower allowances have on public services?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Lower allowances would mean less funding for our critical public services resulting in poorer quality services for New Zealanders. We can see examples of this in the current state of our health system with leaky hospitals and overstretched staff and in our education system with more and more students enrolling but fewer teachers training. Anyone advocating for lower allowances would have to tell the New Zealand public what public services they would cut.
4. Transport—Regional Fuel TaxJAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) to the Minister of TransportTransport—Regional Fuel Tax4. JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by all his statements and actions on fuel taxes?Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Transport): Yes when described and reported accurately.Jami-Lee Ross: Will he support the calls from councils located in the Wellington Canterbury Bay of Plenty and Waikato regions to have regional fuel taxes in place when he only ever said it would be required in Auckland?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I've made it very clear publicly and to the councils in question that the Government's intention as demonstrated in the bill that is currently before the Parliament the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill that only Auckland Council will have the opportunity to put in place a regional fuel tax during this parliamentary term.Jami-Lee Ross: Will he campaign for the next 2½ years for councils located within the Wellington Canterbury Bay of Plenty and Waikato regions to tax their hard-working taxpayers more to have regional fuel taxes in place?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The member will learn the issues that we'll be campaigning on in the next election a little closer to the time.Jami-Lee Ross: Was he embarrassed when his officials told him that the total number of submissions in favour of his regional fuel tax legislation is 8 percent?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: No because I believe that Aucklanders understand that under this Government they are going to see action on fixing the gridlock that plagues our country's biggest city and costs it $1.3 billion every year in lost productivity. Aucklanders want action and as the New Zealand Herald said last week let's just do it.Marja Lubeck: Supplementary?SPEAKER: Question No. 5—oh sorry. Marja Lubeck—supplementary.Marja Lubeck: Will the proposed Auckland regional fuel tax be spent on the light rail network?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I thank the member for that question. I'm pleased to confirm that not one cent raised by Auckland Council's regional fuel tax will be spent on the light rail network. In fact today the Government launched a market-sounding and procurement process for the light rail project that will be funded from the city's share of the National Land Transport Fund and in all likelihood innovative funding from other investors. It is another great day under this Government for growth and prosperity in Auckland.
Mark RonHon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): Just a brief explanation around the date changes. So I am advised that yes the bill's commencement clause as amended in Supplementary Order Paper 24 specifies certain provisions of the bill relating to definitions used in the bill and the requirement to register as a broker and obtain a permit for brokering activity come into force on 1 February 2019. Most of the provisions of the bill come into force on 1 June 2019 as the honourable member Simon O'Connor has just discussed.This is to enable the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade as the new regulator to put in place the necessary regulatory and enforcement frameworks before 1 February 2019. The staggered commencement also enables persons whose activities will be regulated under the bill to become registered and to obtain permits for brokering activity before the rest of the bill comes into force on 1 June 2019 something that I think is quite clearly very reasonable and aimed at facilitating and assisting those people who intend registering.Clause 1 agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 24 in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters to clause 2 be agreed to.Amendment agreed to.Clause 2 as amended agreed to.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill with amendment no progress on the Families Commission Act Repeal Bill and no progress on the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill.Report adopted.The House adjourned at 9.57 p.m.
Radhakrishnan PriyancaPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour): I move That the question be now put.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 24 in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters to Part 3 be agreed to.Amendment agreed to.Part 3 as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 24 in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters to Schedule 1 be agreed to.Amendment agreed to.Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.Schedule 2 agreed to.
Mark RonHon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): Thank you Madam Chair. I just want to try to take a quick call just to cover off some of those questions and again it's useful that the committee of the whole House is canvassing areas that the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee report didn't canvass. I assume that the members on the select committee did not see—bearing in mind that they were part of the Government who actually drafted up the original bill—any great need to canvass into these areas in Part 3 as deeply. It did make recommendations to amend clause 33(1)(a)(iii) recommendations which were accepted in the final draft.But one of the questions was Why military ships or aircraft?" A Royal New Zealand Navy ship or Royal New Zealand Air Force aircraft is under New Zealand sovereign jurisdiction. Therefore conducting and brokering from these would constitute an offence. I would have thought that's pretty clear. The questions around embassies and why they're not included—embassies are not sovereign New Zealand soil and there are issues around immunities there.Penalties—there are penalties for providing false and misleading information. The penalties prescribed in the bill are comparable with other New Zealand legislation so it's a consistency argument in that space. In terms of section 4 of the Crimes Act one of the things that I will just cover off is there are some questions around the appropriateness of the penalties which I think the Hon Tim Macindoe raised and felt that they were not sufficiently high. I'm surprised because the select committee report has not said that. The select committee report clearly is silent; therefore I assumed it agreed with the bill. But to explain and try to be helpful the bill contains criminal penalties and civil enforcement mechanisms for offences.The key offences of conducting brokering without being registered and/or without a permit or in breach of the conditions of the registration or permit—the maximum penalty for that is five years' imprisonment or a fine of up to $100000. So I think if you look in the legislation at the low end of the offences it provides an escalatory regime which is in compliance and conformance with existing similar New Zealand legislation. If you take that first step which Mr Macindoe felt was a little bit low—"A term of imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or a fine … [of] $10000"—and then you bounce that up against the top end then an escalatory regime is in place which is applied according to the level of the offence and how it occurred. I think five years' imprisonment or a fine of up to $100000 probably fits in the top-end zone that Mr Macindoe was thinking of and is probably why the select committee is silent in its report on those particular clauses of Part 3."
Macindoe Tim; Rurawhe AdrianHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I noticed when the Minister commenced his second call then that the digital clocks appear to be malfunctioning. I just wonder if it's possible to ensure that they do count down accurately from five minutes because it's quite disconcerting if you're taking a call and you think OK I've got to try to get to it within a certain time." to find that the timing is not being accurately displayed.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I can assure the member that the clock that I'm watching here is showing the correct one. [Interruption] Let me finish. The clocks there are indicative only. The clock that matters is here. It does have some funny peculiarity from time to time which I haven't figured out myself.Hon Tim Macindoe: Mr Chair?Chris Penk: Mr Chair?CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I call Chris Penk."
Local Electoral Matters Bill — First Reading
Accident Compensation Amendment Bill — First Reading
Wagner NickyHon NICKY WAGNER (National): I'm very happy to be here to support this Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. I'm happy to support it because they are sensible changes to the Accident Compensation Act. It's the work that was done—these changes were identified—when National was in Government and I'd just like to make the point that the work was done under the auspices of the Productivity Commission and done by the Hon Michael Woodhouse as has been mentioned in the House today. So it is very good to see this finally coming to fruition.The main changes to this Act are to make sure that the accident compensation regime is fair and is fair to those who are injured near their retirement age. Also there are significant changes to streamline the complaints process which I think is a good thing as well. ACC is a world-leading no-fault scheme. It is based on the idea that it's fair for New Zealanders to be protected regardless of where they're injured—whether it's at work whether it's at play—and that no fault occurred in that injury. So it is a world-leading scheme and I think it's something that we should be very proud of.In terms of these changes to do with being near retirement age most New Zealanders these days work after they're 65 whether it's part-time or full-time work. In the past under the legislation somebody who was injured near to 65 years of age had to choose between taking ACC weekly compensation or whether they were going to take superannuation. Of course those people had been working; they deserved to be able to have that compensation. But they did get a choice—they had to make a decision.So the changes of this bill will make sure that they can access both their weekly compensation and their superannuation for a limited time: for 24 months. It also allows for spouses—surviving spouses—to get up to five years of those weekly payments. I think that's an important improvement to the Act as well. There are other sensible changes. For example it also protects New Zealand workers posted overseas. It was not right that those people posted overseas may have less protection than if they were working in New Zealand. So now they are treated exactly the same way as if they were injured in New Zealand.In terms of the complaints process they're looking to streamline that process. At the moment there are two separate systems and one of them is not used as much as the other. So this bill disestablishes the Accident Compensation Appeal Authority—that's the one that is little used—so that there will be less confusion in terms of complaints more efficiency during one process.So as I said these are sensible amendments. They were identified during the last Government. National worked on them and it's very good to see them coming to the House. I support this bill.
Falloon AndrewANDREW FALLOON (National—Rangitata): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker for the opportunity to speak this afternoon on the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. I want to acknowledge the Minister who's brought this bill to the House Iain Lees-Galloway and also note his recognition of the previous Minister for ACC the Hon Michael Woodhouse and the work that was done by him and by the previous National Government in bringing this bill to the House. We are very happy to support it. I do note though that we're now seven months into a Labour - New Zealand First - Green Government and this is all that they've brought to the House for ACC legislation. Now some of us have got very good memories about the nine years—the nine very good years—that Labour were in Opposition and some of us do remember some of the things they said about ACC during that time. They made all sorts of claims all sorts of complaints and all sorts of promises. Just last year in July we had Sue Moroney at the time—I don't know quite what happened to her—saying that ACC has become bound up in complex bureaucracy and needs a shake-up." So where is that bill? Where is that shake-up that the Labour Party promised? We haven't seen it. Well I think I know what's happened to that because Ms Moroney also went on to say that "I can't see the point in spending more money with layers of bureaucracy." So I think I know what happened to Ms Moroney and why she's no longer here because not long after that just days before the election we had the now Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern the then Labour leader coming out and thundering about the track record of ACC under the National Government. She went on to say that she believed that ACC needed independent oversight but would not describe what that would look like. All she would say was that there was a requirement for further bureaucracy but would not say what it looked like. It is more evidence that the Labour Party did nothing in their nine years in Opposition in policy development. As we've heard from previous speakers they've again pushed it down the road—another review another inquiry another working group. This bill is proof that once again the Labour Party are relying on the hard work of the previous National Government."
Points of Order — Debating Chamber—Delays
Marriage (Court Consent to Marriage of Minors) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Justice Committee
Hipkins Chris; Mallard TrevorPOINTS OF ORDERParliamentary Precinct—Members' Access to the ChamberHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Yesterday on the way to the House several Ministers and others crossing from Bowen House to the Beehive found it very difficult to actually make it to the House because of the press gallery forming effectively what were five clusters all around the entrance and I suspect that there is a delay today and that the member who is the subject of the first question is unable to do that. I wonder whether you would consider whether in fact there should be a time limit on that and whether that should end prior to when the bells stop ringing. Otherwise there are going to be situations where Ministers are unable to answer questions in the House because of the delay.SPEAKER: I appreciate the tactics that the member has just employed. I think the member is aware that if there is actually a physical hazard caused by anyone stopping members coming into the House it is a breach of privilege and should be reported accordingly. If members want to come to me quietly afterwards and indicate chokepoints or specific problems then of course I will take it up with the chairperson of the press gallery but I don't propose otherwise to take any action.
Hayes Jo; Mallard TrevorWEDNESDAY 9 MAY 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Karakia.MARRIAGE (COURT CONSENT TO MARRIAGE OF MINORS) AMENDMENT BILLInstruction to Justice CommitteeJO HAYES (National): I seek leave for the Justice Committee or a committee of the whole House when considering the Marriage (Court Consent to Marriage of Minors) Amendment Bill to have authority to consider and if it thinks fit adopt amendments to the Civil Union Act 2004 and the Care of Children Act 2004 despite Standing Order 260 and for the bill to be an omnibus bill.SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that? There appears to be none. That is agreed.
Tuesday 8 May 2018 - Volume 729
Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill — Procedure
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the motion be agreed to.Ayes 55New Zealand National 55.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Motion not agreed to.
VoteASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): The question is that the motion be agreed to. Those of that opinion will say—Jonathan Young: I seek leave for this bill to proceed forthwith through all remaining stages without debate and on one vote.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I started putting the question and I'm inclined to finish but I'll just take some advice on that. As I thought there is a motion on the Table and I am putting the question for that so that leave can't be given.A party vote was called for on the question That the motion be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 55.Motion agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 64 Noes 55.
Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Amendment Bill — First Reading (continued)
Tariff (PACER Plus) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Tariff (PACER Plus) Amendment Bill be now read a first 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 first time.Bill referred to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee.
7. Health Services—New Dunedin HospitalDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour) to the Minister of HealthHealth Services—New Dunedin Hospital7. Dr LIZ CRAIG (Labour) to the Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made regarding Dunedin Hospital?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Health): Last week I announced the location of the new Dunedin Hospital. It will be built on the site of the former Cadbury's factory and parts of surrounding blocks. It's a major milestone for the project and represents a major step forward to delivering the 21st century hospital that the people of the South have waited for for far too long.Dr Liz Craig: So why was this site chosen?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Early on we made a commitment to build the new hospital in Dunedin's city centre to give certainty to the local community including local business owners. This is important because it means the new hospital will retain important links with the University of Otago and existing medical facilities nearby and indeed the polytechnic. The site also provides flexibility for the design process and allows for further development down the track if it is required.Dr Liz Craig: So what are the next steps to progress this project?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Now the site is selected planning and design will progress with haste feeding into a detailed business case to be presented to Cabinet in the middle of next year. Work will also start on the resource management consent process. We remain on track to start construction before the next election. The people of the South have waited too long for their new hospital which is exactly why we're moving ahead without delay.Hon Michael Woodhouse: On what date to the nearest month did the Southern Partnership Group first resolve to recommend to the Ministry of Health that the preferred location be the former Cadbury's site and surrounding blocks?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I don't have that detail with me today but it was not so long ago I can tell the member.
4. Housing—HomelessnessANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour) to the Minister of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHousing—Homelessness4. ANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour) to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development: What is the Government doing to reduce homelessness this winter?Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Housing and Urban Development): On Friday the Prime Minister announced the first step in tackling New Zealand's record rate of homelessness. Investment of $100 million will provide more than 1500 additional emergency and transitional public and Housing First places. Budget 2018 will also fund Housing First services for more than 1450 households over the next four years.Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki: What effect will these measures have on homelessness?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Past neglect means that homelessness is likely to get worse before it gets better. Initiatives that we announced will mean 1500 fewer families and individuals living in cars and garages this winter. This Government is committed to increasing supply. We've stopped the State house sell-off and now we're expanding Housing First. There's a lot to do but this Government is committed to ending homelessness in New Zealand.Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki: What will the funding boost for Housing First deliver? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The $20.5 million of new spending in Budget 2018 will properly fund Housing First to more than 900 households in Auckland Christchurch Tauranga Wellington and Lower Hutt which the past Government did not fully fund and $43 million will expand the Housing First programme to a further and additional 550 households in other regions.
1. Government Financial Position—ReportsWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSGovernment Financial Position—Reports1. WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the strength of the Government's finances?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Today Treasury released the Financial Statements of the Government for the nine months to March. These showed core Crown tax revenue at $57.5 billion $1.1 billion higher than forecast in the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update (HYEFU). The Crown's operating balance before gains and losses surplus was $3.3 billion $910 million higher than the HYEFU forecast. This shows that after six months of this Government's financial management the economy continues to perform well.Willow-Jean Prime: What did Treasury say contributed to these better than expected results? [Interruption] Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Modesty prevents me. Treasury said that corporate and income tax revenue was above forecast indicating that business profits have grown more in 2018 than Treasury thought and that employment growth has remained strong. This is consistent with figures released in the household labour force survey last week which showed the unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest level since December 2008. It is very pleasing indeed to see businesses continuing to succeed and create jobs.Willow-Jean Prime: What do these results show about the Government's fiscal management?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: These numbers show that the Government is delivering on its commitment to manage the books responsibly. While it's encouraging that the economy is delivering additional revenue it is important that we use this revenue wisely. In Budget 2018 we will continue to balance the important priorities of responsible fiscal management and making the investments—SPEAKER: OK that's enough. The member—Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Oh they were so interested!SPEAKER: Well they're so interested they've got an extra two supplementaries.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the finance Minister as to how it is that unemployment has fallen as the Government has announced an increase to minimum wages—or in short why hasn't the sky fallen in?SPEAKER: The Minister can answer the first part. I think he's not claiming responsibility for the second.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No no. I'm most certainly not Mr Speaker. What I can say is despite the regular prognostications that the minimum wage increase will lead to huge reductions in employment that has never been the case and in fact we're very proud of the fact that unemployment is now the lowest that it has been in 10 years.
Martin TraceyHon TRACEY MARTIN (Minister of Internal Affairs): Just to answer a couple of questions that are still unanswered with regard to a previous speaker questioning how there would be the enforcement of the bill. In the case of a clear breach New Zealand would gather evidence in the usual way utilising mutual legal assistance arrangements with other countries and wide law-enforcement relationships including Interpol to establish a case.I think you would find that if there was a major incident a terrorism incident there is a lot of investigation and a lot of tracking back that goes on. I think people probably underestimate the high skill level that New Zealand has in participating to ensure that we are safe and that our world is as safe as we can possibly make it. So that answers that question.With regard to safeguards so that somebody—an employee working in a warehouse—cannot be captured by this piece of legislation the bill includes a number of safeguards to ensure that only appropriate brokering activity is captured and that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has a wide range of tools to address breaches of the Act. The bill's focus is on core brokering activities and does not include services that are merely ancillary. For example a person who acts as an agent or intermediary person for persons involved in a brokering transaction is captured; a person who merely provides administrative customs brokering or financial services in relation to brokering transactions is not covered. Somebody I would assume who is in a warehouse and is packing things—single items or whatever—and is not in a level of decision making or at the level that they could have some form of knowledge of the final end use of those items would not be covered under this legislation.There are a number of exemptions to the registration and permit requirements. A person who brokers dual-use goods is exempt unless the dual-use goods are intended for a prohibited use in the bill which is the use in weapons of mass destruction programmes or military end use. The prospective broker must undertake due diligence. I think therein lies the key: the prospective broker must undertake due diligence to ensure that the intended end use of the goods will not be used for prohibited purposes.The onus lies on us all to keep the world a safe place. That means the onus lies on those who are selling; therefore it is their business to know where their goods are going. So no we certainly won't be whipping out there and arresting any store people but if somebody knows that they are taking part in this then we have the tools by which we will make sure they stop it.