edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Dean Jacqui: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9167. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): The Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill is an important bill. It implements a settlement agreement between the service providers—the support workers—and their unions and the 20 district health boards and the Crown to pay for the time and costs for workers travelling between their clients. It is not only important to the workers themselves but also very important to their clients who I know have felt for the people who come into their homes and support them so very well.Along with other members I want to acknowledge officials who have assisted the Health Committee and the Crown in the finessing of this bill. I actually want to acknowledge Barbara Stewart’s speech. I think that Barbara shows a great understanding compassion and an affinity for the needs and the circumstances around this. It might be rare to commend another member but I do want to acknowledge and congratulate her on the approach that she has taken towards this bill along of course with my colleagues on the National side.Being electorate-based MPs many of us have day-to-day contact with our constituents. For people like me in a rural provincial constituency this issue around workers having to travel quite considerable distances between their clients has been a matter that has been of concern to us. So I am very proud that the National Government has brought this bill to the House and I support it along with other members. Thank you.
Kuriger Barbara: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKuriger Barbara: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9164. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): It is a pleasure to be speaking in support of the Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill. I also just want to acknowledge the service providers the support workers the unions the Crown the district health boards and everyone who has been involved in this piece of legislation.To keep sick elderly and disabled people in their own homes for as long as they are able to stay there depends on having these wonderful people who go into their homes and do the great work that they do every day in supporting them. You know the clients set their clocks by the visits. These people turn up they have smiles and they have a great attitude. I think it is great to see this piece of legislation going through to secure a better future for these health and disability care workers.It has been a real pleasure to work with the Health Committee and with the other parties on getting to the stage where we are putting this piece of legislation in front of the House for the third time and it is my pleasure to support it. Thank you.
O'Connor Simon: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9161. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I am going to make this a relatively short contribution partly because I think it has actually been quite well articulated by the previous speaker Annette King and by others as this bill has gone through the House but partly symbolically as well in so far as we have moved very swiftly as a select committee to get this bill back into the House. As was noted previously it was brought back to the House just before Christmas and obviously is to be put into effect.This Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill is ultimately a process that we as a Parliament are going through correctly and rightly. But as has been noted by other speakers—and I am sure it will come—this is putting into effect an agreement by other parties outside of the Parliament: the Crown the district health boards the employers and ultimately the employees particularly those represented through the unions who work in home care. They got around the table they discussed they negotiated—I was not privy to all of the discussions but I am sure there were many many that were had to bring this agreement into effect. We as a Parliament have been asked to put that legislatively into effect and from the very moment that it has come into the Health Committee all the political parties—National Labour New Zealand First the Greens—have worked incredibly hard to make that happen.I just want to record my thanks to all the committee members once again for the work that they have done to all the officials for the work that they took on and the advice that they gave us in a very timely manner and to all the submitters—I found them very articulate and that they brought home very clearly what this is all about. Ultimately this is about the home-care workers. I think it is just fantastic what they do—absolutely fantastic. So to them—thank you. Keep up the good work. We know that there is always more to be done but we hope that this little bit of legislation is acknowledged for the import that it has.
Upston Louise: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUpston Louise: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9159. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Land Information) on behalf of theMinister of Health: I move That the Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill be now read a third time. This bill formalises one part of a negotiated agreement that resolved a claim filed with the Employment Relations Authority around payment for travel time and costs for home and community support workers. The out-of-court settlement has led to an agreed minimum rate of payment and an agreed formulae to determine payment amounts. This bill formalises those arrangements and provides an enduring affordable and sustainable way to compensate support workers for the in-between travel they do when supporting older people disabled people and those recovering from injury or illness with their household management and personal care needs.I would like to acknowledge the role of the settlement parties in working together throughout the passage of the bill to develop a piece of legislation that is clear and workable and delivers on the intent of the settlement agreement. The Health Committee has ensured a good outcome through its close engagement on the subject matter and its flexibility around process. The Parliamentary Counsel Office and other officials worked professionally and with considerable goodwill throughout what has been a very tight time frame and I acknowledge their contribution.This bill represents an important milestone in recognising the valuable work of people who provide care and support for many New Zealanders. It will benefit around 24000 care and support workers who assist older people disabled people and those recovering from illness and injury with personal care and household management. This bill is a very positive investment by the Government in some of the lowest-paid care and support workers in the health sector. They will benefit from a total Government investment of around $38 million a year or approximately $150 million over a 4-year period. This bill is a priority for this Government and I am aware that some other countries are also dealing with this issue and will be watching our progress with interest. I am pleased to commend this bill to the House.
Davidson Marama: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDavidson Marama: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9158. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.MARAMA DAVIDSON (Green) to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: When she said this week at the Pacific climate change conference that “Pacific voices are heard loud and clear at the negotiating table and there are some things that we hold different views on” what were the specific points of difference that she was referring to?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Climate Change Issues): There is a lot of common ground in the priorities that New Zealand and other Pacific countries have on climate change. I was not referring to anything specific when I made the comment. The sentiment I wanted to reflect was that climate change will obviously have a significant impact and is having a significant impact on Pacific nations and we recognise that. But we may for example currently hold a different view on climate-induced migration and the timing of when something like that might happen. The point I was endeavouring to make in the speech is that we may have a lot of things in common but New Zealand at no time should presume to speak for our Pacific neighbours.Marama Davidson: Does she agree with the Pacific’s united call for a moratorium on new coalmines?Hon PAULA BENNETT: No not at this time.Marama Davidson: Will she support new ways for Pacific people to migrate to New Zealand in response to the call of the President of Kiribati Anote Tong for his people to be able to migrate with dignity?Hon PAULA BENNETT: We have agreements with Pacific countries. I think that we will continue to see issues in that area—it is something that we are keen over time to progress. But at this stage we stick with our current policies.Marama Davidson: Is not the major point of difference between this Government and Pacific leaders that the Pacific nations are struggling and fighting to stay above water and our climate target does not do nearly enough to help them in that fight?Hon PAULA BENNETT: The reality is that New Zealand is doing a lot to help our Pacific countries. We recently just announced more money like $635 million that we want to put in and I see a lot of that—$200 million as well—being spent in those Pacific countries. There are things that we can do and are doing now such as more renewable energy there that we are leading—a lot of that work that the Minister of Foreign Affairs is leading throughout the Pacific countries. I do not think our emissions target is actually what is causing the problems in the Pacific nations. But we will play more than our fair share in that area and we will help our cousins as we should do.
Cunliffe David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCunliffe David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9155. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn): I seek leave to have this question held over as an additional question so it can be answered by—Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is? There is objection.
Simpson Scott: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSimpson Scott: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9155. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel) to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent reports has he received on growth in seafood exports?Hon NATHAN GUY: Recent reports show that seafood exports reached a record high of $1.63 billion last year up over 6 percent on 2014. A significant part of this growth was from greenshell mussel exports. As new season supplies became available 300 tonnes of mussels were shipped to Korea and that compared with 97 tonnes over the same period of December 2014. Total seafood exports to Korea grew by nearly 12 percent last year—a very important new and emerging market.Scott Simpson: How will the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) benefit our seafood exporters?Hon NATHAN GUY: A very good question. The TPP will eliminate all tariffs on New Zealand’s fish and fish products once fully implemented. This will save the industry around $8 million a year. Consumers around the world are increasingly looking for high-quality sustainably harvested seafood. The TPP will help place our products more competitively in these very important international markets.
Foster-Bell Paul: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9152. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National) to the Minister of Tourism: What reports has he received about the growth in number of tourist guest nights?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Acting Minister of Tourism) on behalf of theMinister of Tourism: There is more good news in the tourism sector with a recent report showing a significant growth in the number of guest nights. The December 2015 accommodation survey shows national guest nights were up 6.2 percent last year and December was the 21st consecutive month of growth. This means more people coming to New Zealand staying longer and spending more. The increase has been in both international guest nights as well as domestic ones.Paul Foster-Bell: What evidence is there that regions are experiencing the benefit of rising tourist numbers?Hon PAULA BENNETT: Eleven out of our 12 regions have experienced a growth in the number of guest nights. Tourism is a big contributor to our regional economies with over half of our international tourism expenditure being spent outside the three major cities. Many regions are attracting investment in new accommodation as a result. In December I opened a new Novotel hotel in New Plymouth which will create at least 70 new jobs 85 beds and support the growth of Taranaki’s tourism industry which is already worth $233 million a year.Paul Foster-Bell: What is the Government doing to help ensure tourism continues its impressive growth?Hon PAULA BENNETT: On top of the very impressive and unprecedented $700 million in tourism and tourism promotion since 2008 today we have the Prime Minister and the Minister for Economic Development turning the first sod on the construction of the New Zealand International Convention Centre which will bring an extra $90 million in tourism spending every year. This world-class facility will host conferences of up to 3150 people and will be able to host up to 33000 additional conference delegates a year who will spend their money at the hotels at the shops and at those tourism ventures in Auckland. A thousand jobs will be created in the construction phase and more than 1140 people employed.
Naylor Jono: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9149. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.JONO NAYLOR (National) to the Minister for Social Development: What reports has she received on the number of children living in benefit-dependent households?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): I recently received the Salvation Army’s state of the nation report which states that the number of children living in benefit-dependent households is at its lowest since 1998. Our welfare reforms have contributed to this decline. According to the report the number of children in benefit-dependent homes has fallen by 40000 over the past 3 years. Getting parents off welfare and into work is the best way to get children out of poverty. This report indicates that our welfare reforms are doing just that.Jono Naylor: Why is the Government focused on reducing the number of children in benefit-dependent households?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: As the Minister of Finance outlined in his speech to the Institute of Public Administration New Zealand today children in benefit-dependent households are more likely to leave school without National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) level 2 they are more likely to have contact with Child Youth and Family and with the Department of Corrections before they are 18 and they are more likely to end up on the benefit themselves. But as the Salvation Army report shows more young people are achieving NCEA level 2 and benefit numbers and youth offending are both continuing to fall. We are also overhauling Child Youth and Family to get better results for young people in care and by focusing on reducing the number of children in benefit-dependent households we are helping to break the cycle and improve the long-term outcomes for those children.Carmel Sepuloni: Given the Salvation Army’s state of the nation report finding that “unemployment stays the same as benefit numbers fall” and “the number of children on benefits decline as child poverty rates remain the same” will she commit to collating reliable data and reporting on the employment outcomes for people going off benefit to ensure that the missing thousands and their children are in fact better off?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: To the first part of the question the good news is that the household labour force survey showed that unemployment is dropping and that is a continual process. To the second part of the question I have actually asked the social policy evaluation and research unit to do some research. Despite the fact that Work and Income does publish information on exits off benefits I have asked for some research to be done on following people who do exit benefits to see exactly where they are and what their circumstances are.
Mark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9143. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements on the flag referenda?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Acting Prime Minister): Yes.Ron Mark: How does the Prime Minister reconcile his words “we will take a disciplined approach to Government spending. You work too hard for us to waste your money.” when two-thirds of UMR Research respondents agreed that the $26 million flag referendum has been a distraction and a waste of money?Hon BILL ENGLISH: They have the opportunity to express that or any other view through the referendum itself but I might point out to the member that the bulk of the spending is actually on postage. The postage system is run by New Zealand Post which is owned by the Government so a fair bit of the money comes back.Ron Mark: Why do he and the committee putting out the propaganda on his black and blue logo call it a silver fern when even a colour-blind person can tell it is not a silver fern? In fact it looks more like a feather—a white one.Hon BILL ENGLISH: Again whatever the member’s opinion—or anyone’s opinion—about the fern this is despite New Zealand First’s opposition a thoroughly democratic process. That is every eligible New Zealander will have the chance to vote on the flag and from what we can see there is growing public interest in that vote. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Both sides need to settle just a little.Ron Mark: When he said “It’s no secret that I’m a supporter of changing the New Zealand flag.” did he mean the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria option; the blue red and white option; the black and blue option; or the pale blue option which flew unnoticed for 13 days on the Auckland harbour bridge? Which option Prime Minister?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I certainly agree with the statement. It is no secret that he is proposing change and that he favours the flag that is on the ballot.Ron Mark: What does he say to former National Party supporters who have come over to New Zealand First because—Hon Members: Oh!Ron Mark: We signed up some yesterday. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! My patience will run out relatively quickly when I stand to my feet and call for order and interjections continue. If that happens again then the person who does interject will leave me no choice but to ask them to leave. The question now will be heard again and in silence.Ron Mark: What does he say to former National Party supporters who have come over to New Zealand First because we stand up for the values his party has abandoned just like our flag?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I would say to them that the Prime Minister will be at the front door to welcome both of them back.
Brownlee Gerry: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Business Statement[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9143. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 1 March the Government will conclude the debate on the Prime Minister’s statement. The Government also intends to make progress on a number of pieces of legislation including the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill and the Radiation Safety Bill. Wednesday will be a members’ day.
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9143. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 18 February 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Business StatementHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 1 March the Government will conclude the debate on the Prime Minister’s statement. The Government also intends to make progress on a number of pieces of legislation including the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill and the Radiation Safety Bill. Wednesday will be a members’ day.
Vote: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9034. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment to the amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 94 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to clause 5 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Clause 5 as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 94 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to clause 6 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Clause 6 as amended agreed to.Bill to be reported with amendment presently.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill without amendment the Radiation Safety Bill with amendment the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Amendment Bill with amendment and the Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill with amendment.Report adopted.
Vote: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment to the amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Clare Curran to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 94 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to clause 5 be agreed to:In new section 8AB after subsection (4) insert:(4A)The board of the public radio company is to determine if a proposed service meets the requirements of subsection (3).(4B)Any determination made under subsection (4A) must not be subject to direction by the Minister of Broadcasting or any other Minister.
Vote: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment to the amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Clare Curran to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 94 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to clause 5 be agreed to:In new section 8AB after subsection (4) insert:(4A)The Minister of Broadcasting—(a) is to determine if a proposed service meets the requirements of subsection (3); and(b) having so determined must—(i) issue a written notice of that determination to the public radio company; and(ii) present that determination to the House of Representatives within two working days of issue and at least 1 calendar month before the determination takes effect.
Vote: Radiation Safety Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Radiation Safety Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9021. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.The question was put that Parts 1 and 2 as amended schedules 1 to 5 and clauses 1 and 2 be agreed to.Parts 1 and 2 as amended schedules 1 to 5 and clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.Bill to be reported with amendment presently.
Vote: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9011. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Bill read a second time.
Vote: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9011. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the question be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Question agreed to.
Bayly Andrew: Taxation (Annual Rates for 2015-16 Research and Development and Remedial Matters) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBayly Andrew: Taxation (Annual Rates for 2015-16 Research and Development and Remedial Matters) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9053. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): Have we not heard some weird and wonderful things tonight? I heard earlier on that the Australian research and development tax system is much more simple than the New Zealand system. Well that is garbage I have got to say. I have just listened to the previous speaker David Clark talk about debt levels and tax rates for New Zealand.I want to take the opportunity to deal with the debt issue that the previous speaker has just been talking about. He is claiming that this country has got a massive level of debt. I just wish that this person would have a historical context in which to make a statement like that and actually look at some of the facts. If we look at the facts today our current debt is 26 percent of GDP. By 2020 in approximately 5 years’ time it will be about 20 percent.If you look at the Lucky Country Australia its debt levels are currently just about ours but by 2020—the same period; in 5 years’ time—they will be just under 40 percent i.e. twice New Zealand’s rate of debt. If we look at Europe and the UK debt is currently just over about 80 percent to GDP and in 5 years’ time it will be at that same level which again will be four times our debt level. We would be having a totally different conversation.If we look at America that place that a lot of people like to talk about current debt levels—Mr Clark you should stay and learn a little bit about debt if you are going to talk about it. Current debt levels in the US at the moment are 107 percent of GDP and are expected in 5 years’ time to be about 100 percent five times New Zealand’s current debt. It is five times! And you were saying that New Zealand is out of control Mr Clark.Anywhere in the rest of the world we would be talking about how we are going to put up tax how we are going to be reducing all our social expenditure. Well we are lucky to be in a situation through prudent management where we can even be talking about introducing research and development tax credits dealing with black hole expenditure and all that good stuff to try to make this economy much more successful than where it is at at the moment and grow it even faster.This bill actually has four key elements and unfortunately we have really only focused today on research and development but I would like to say that it also deals with Child Support Act changes. It also deals with GST on bodies corporate—again something that people wanted; 13000 body corporate owners have come to us. Finally it deals with controlled foreign companies and foreign investment firms. Again these are good tax measures they are comprehensive and they are all part of driving this economy forward. Thank you very much.Bill read a third time.
Tisch Lindsay: Taxation (Annual Rates for 2015-16 Research and Development and Remedial Matters) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Taxation (Annual Rates for 2015-16 Research and Development and Remedial Matters) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9050. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Dr David Clark—on the subject.
Borrows Chester: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): The amendment to clause 4 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 94 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams is ruled out of order as being a direct negation of the question.Clause 4 not agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Clare Curran to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 94 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to clause 5 be agreed to:In new section 8AB(4)(c)(ii) after “free to access” insert “or the delivery platform includes commercial content or sponsorship references”.
Borrows Chester: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9028. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): I call Kris—sorry; I call Gareth Hughes.Kris Faafoi: I think you were nearly there.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): I was nearly there until I noticed Mr Hughes had not had a call.
Borrows Chester: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9023. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Members we turn now to the Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill. When we were last debating this bill leave had been granted for all provisions to be taken as one question for the purpose of debate. Kris Faafoi had the call and he has 4 minutes and 12 seconds remaining should he wish to avail himself of that opportunity.
Williams Poto: Radiation Safety Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Poto: Radiation Safety Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9020. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East): I am going to take a short call on the Radiation Safety Bill. Despite being named by Mrs King as being the excellent Poto Williams I was not actually sitting on the Health Committee at the time that the submissions were being heard. However I do want to make a couple of points just to add to the excellent contribution that the Hon Annette King has made.Having read through some of the submissions and there were a few—not a great deal but definitely from people who understand the industry well such as the Canterbury District Health Board and Radiation Protection Services Ltd which is called RadPro. They had a couple of suggestions to make which confirm the issues that Annette King has raised. In the first one Radiation Protection Services says that it supports the general intent of the bill but that the problem really was with the title. It supports the change to the Ionising Radiation Safety Bill which actually clarifies that we are talking about ionising radiation as opposed to non-ionising radiation. It would clarify that for them professionally.In relation to the Canterbury District Health Board it talked specifically about clause 10(1) and the associated definitions to be amended to make it clear that repairs may be carried out on source equipment. As the legislation went to the committee it read: “No person may deal with a radiation source unless it is fit for intended purpose.” The Canterbury District Health Board recommended clarifying that point. Also it talked about the definition of a calibration service by adding at the end of the definition: “or other organisations or similar.”This bill brings us up to date with other international standards and obligations around radiation protection and it is well overdue that we align ourselves to other legislation. It has taken a long time to get the bill to this point so I am not going to speak for too long because it is important that we do pass this legislation. I support and endorse and encourage other parties to support Hon Annette King’s Supplementary Order Paper 140 which actually just clarifies the name of the bill. It really does also bring us in line with compliance for the best practice for international standards and helps us to meet those international treaties. I think that is about the sum of my contribution. I thank you and commend the bill to the House.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 131 in the name of the Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman to Parts 1 and 2 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Radiation Safety Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Radiation Safety Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9018. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Hayes Joanne: Radiation Safety Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Radiation Safety Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9018. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National): I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question for the purposes of this debate.
Hayes Joanne: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9011. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National): I seek leave for all provisions be taken as one question for the purposes of the debate with a vote on each question.The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): It has been sought that all the provisions be taken as one question. Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.
Naylor Jono: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9011. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONO NAYLOR (National): It is a great pleasure to be the last speaker on the second reading of this bill and to put the record straight a little bit if I can. I think that what we have lost sight of in this debate—certainly the members opposite have—is that this bill is about delivering better more flexible more responsive social housing for New Zealand particularly for vulnerable New Zealanders. This is not about flogging off State assets. This is about developing better systems. It is about enabling other players to play a part in social housing within New Zealand.I know that back in the 1930s Michael Joseph Savage came up with a very good idea which was State housing in New Zealand. It served a very good purpose. But the members opposite who seem to be bereft of any new ideas want us to keep doing things the way they have always been done. They want to stick to the same ideas that were done back in the 1930s—that is all that could ever be done in New Zealand. But New Zealand is an innovative country. New Zealand has a kind of a culture here where we say we want to find better ways to do things.We do not want to settle for what has always been; we want to do things better. We are going to do things better. We are going to be more responsive and we are going to deliver a better outcome for people in New Zealand. That is the guts behind this bill. That is exactly what we are trying to do. We are going to ensure that we do not just stick to the same old ideas. This is a very good bill and I commend it to the House.The question was put that the amendments recommended by the Social Services Committee by majority be agreed to.
Parmar Parmjeet: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParmar Parmjeet: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9008. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): I am taking a short call to support the Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill on its second reading. The previous speaker David Cunliffe demonstrated how narrowly focused he is.I want to acknowledge the Social Services Committee which did the work on this bill and I want to acknowledge and thank all submitters for their contribution. As we heard the select committee received 11 submissions of which eight were heard. Through those submissions there were two main points that came through. One was around the overall housing issue especially social housing supply. That is a valid concern and that is why we need a social housing reform programme. The second concern that came through was around transparency and again that is a very valid concern. Accountability and transparency of all processes that will be put through by this bill is important to everyone.This bill in the long run will mean that we are able to provide the right type of houses and that our housing stock is utilised effectively. So in the long run this bill will make the actual difference by ensuring that those who are in need are housed in the right type of house and are housed in a timely manner. Listening to previous contributions I have to say regretfully that this issue of social housing has become a political football. Yes I do understand that this bill will enable the transfer of properties from Housing New Zealand to community housing providers but that is to support the development of community housing providers. The social housing reform programme is designed to see that we are able to house people in quality houses and that could be through Housing New Zealand or through community housing providers.As we also heard this bill is based on evidence. One-third of Housing New Zealand’s portfolio is of the wrong type or is in the wrong place. Moreover there are thousands of people on the waiting register. There are thousands who have applied for a transfer. The fact is that currently there are 62000 households receiving an income-related rental subsidy. We have committed to increase that by 3000 households by 2017-18. The aim of this bill is that through Housing New Zealand and community housing providers collectively we are able to provide more housing places.It is a great bill. I support this bill and commend it to the House.
Muller Todd: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMuller Todd: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9005. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): I rise to take a short call to speak in favour of the Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill. Perhaps we may actually have a contribution from somebody who was there and participated in the Social Services Committee as opposed to reading pre-prepared statements of opposition that bear very little reality to what we are debating.In respect of this bill when it came through the select committee—as my colleague Matt Doocey in a very considered contribution has already noted—there were only 11 submitters. The core of some of their concerns in my view related to a fundamental misunderstanding around the policy objectives that we are seeking to promote here. This view that houses should not be sold because only Housing New Zealand has the capacity to provide social housing in this country—for a start other organisations already do provide it and secondly it is looking at the debate through the wrong lens.The issue is not who owns the house. The issue is that we have 62000 income-related rents. Is that sufficient? This Government believes not. We are going to lift it to 65000. That is 3000 more people who are going to be supported to be able to be in a warm dry home because of a demonstrated need for more than what is the case today. That is social housing provision and delivery. The debate around who owns the bricks and mortar and who should own the roof is completely the wrong one. Of those 3000 extra over the next 3 years I am very pleased to see that 70 are going to be in Tauranga because it is a community because of its high growth that a lot of people are moving into and we do need to ensure that those social housing provisions those income-related rents—which actually are the core of social housing provision—grow in my community.The only other point I would like to make in my short call this afternoon is again this view that only community housing organisations and only community organisations are fit to participate in the provision. A strong sentiment came from a few submitters that if you have a profit motive—if you have shareholders in the provision of your service—then somehow you need to be disqualified because you do not have the capacity to care and you do not have the capacity to deliver outcomes. Well that logic is flawed—it is a nonsense. What counts here is the delivery and the outcome of provision not the nature of your commercial structure. It is the wrong debate and is typified by the response that we have had particularly from the Opposition members through the select committee process.I am very pleased to support this bill. It is good thinking it is good policy and it is going to deliver for Tauranga and New Zealand.
Mallard Trevor: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9003. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I am going to call Matt Doocey in a minute but I just want to make it clear that although this is the sixth call it will be regarded as the fifth call to be followed by a full Green call and then we will get ourselves back on to track again. The reason for this is pretty obviously that at the point at which I called Mr O’Rourke he was the only person who actually called for the call. That got us slightly out of order.
Lees-Galloway Iain: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9001. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just to assist with the order of the House usually the Speaker does ask whether the member who was on their feet wishes to complete their call and that would be a signal to other members who are intending to take a call that it might be time for them to rise to their feet and take theirs.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Well I thank the member for his assistance to the House in that particular area but I also think it was unnecessary in that if members had been alert they would have already taken the call.
Mallard Trevor: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9001. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The question is that the—Tim Macindoe: Sorry I beg your pardon Mr Assistant Speaker. Is Carmel Sepuloni not taking her call?The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Well I think that if the member casts his eyes around he could probably work that out.Iain Lees-Galloway: Just speaking to that point—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Well there is no point of order—Iain Lees-Galloway: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I have already ruled that the question that has been raised by the senior Government whip is not a point of order.
Coleman Jonathan: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeColeman Jonathan: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9000. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): I move That this debate be now adjourned.Motion agreed to.Debate interrupted.
Borrows Chester: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:8998. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A split call on behalf of the Green Party. The first 5 minutes is Eugenie Sage.
Borrows Chester: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:8997. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A 5-minute call—Stuart Smith.
Borrows Chester: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:8996. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call on behalf of the National Party. The first 5 minutes is Matt Doocey.