edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
7. Question No. 7—Broadcasting Communications and Digital MediaMELISSA LEE (National) to the Minister of Broadcasting Communications and Digital MediaQuestion No. 7—Broadcasting Communications and Digital Media7. MELISSA LEE (National) to the Minister of Broadcasting Communications and Digital Media: Does he stand by all the Government's actions and policies in relation to the rollout of 5G technology and spectrum in New Zealand?Hon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Broadcasting Communications and Digital Media): Yes. Melissa Lee: Why has there not been an auction for the rights to 5G spectrum this year when former broadcasting Minister the Hon Clare Curran tipped that there would be one by this year? Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The expressions of interest for the early allocation were put out earlier this year. As a result the mobile network operators got into discussions with the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment which pushed the time frame for the spectrum allocation and auction a little further than had been discussed earlier. But we're still on plan to have that early allocation spectrum go live mid - next year. Melissa Lee: Why has he not yet resolved the outstanding iwi 5G spectrum claims that are holding up the roll-out of 5G technology across the country? Hon KRIS FAAFOI: An announcement on the make-up of the early allocation including the iwi claims participation is imminent. Melissa Lee: Does the Government plan to gift iwi an allocation of the 5G spectrum before any auction for rights for stakeholders can occur? Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The member will have to wait for that imminent announcement. Melissa Lee: Does he agree with Fran O'Sullivan who said it is a fundamental absurdity … we lumber on with technology that is fast becoming second world" regarding the delay in the roll-out of 5G spectrum? Hon KRIS FAAFOI: No. I would note that only one operator as of this afternoon has managed to start its 5G service and globally 5G roll-out is in its infancy. The 3.5 megahertz spectrum which we will allocate for the long-term allocation does not become free until November 2022. All the telcos involved know that and are awaiting our announcements around the early-access spectrum allocation and also the long-term allocation of spectrum. So all the telcos and mobile network operators know exactly what the time frame is."
3. Question No. 3—FinanceHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 3—Finance3. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all of his policies and statements on the economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Yes in the context in which they were undertaken and given.Hon Paul Goldsmith: What financial assistance if any is the Government considering for the Bay of Plenty region following Whakaari / White Island's eruption?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The member will appreciate that in the first 24 hours the focus is on the recovery operation and ensuring that we look after all of the families involved. We will move to consider any economic impacts in the following days and act accordingly.Hon Paul Goldsmith: How is his Government working to ensure that the New Zealand economy is strong and resilient and able to cope with challenges thrown our way?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I thank the member for that question. That is the core focus of this Government. That is why we have adopted a very careful approach to fiscal management. It's why we've taken on the wellbeing approach to putting our Budget together which focuses on intergenerational issues. And it's why we are continuing to make significant investments in our infrastructure our hospitals and our schools.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Will he assure New Zealanders that before making any decisions on big infrastructure projects like closing the Ports of Auckland which the Prime Minister suggested will happen his Government will insist on rigorous independent advice on the costs and the benefit?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Yes.Hon Paul Goldsmith: When he said on the radio last night that there are still more questions to answer regarding moving the port what are some of the questions he's asking?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Associate Minister of Transport will be making fuller announcements on these matters on Thursday but I'm on the public record as having indicated that issues including transport logistics in Auckland the impact on the wider region and the overall environmental impacts are important ones for us to consider.
2. Question No. 2—Civil DefenceRINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) to the Minister of Civil DefenceQuestion No. 2—Civil Defence2. RINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) to the Minister of Civil Defence: What actions has the National Emergency Management Agency taken in response to the eruption on Whakaari / White Island?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance) on behalf of the Minister of Civil Defence: I would first like to say that all our thoughts are with the families and loved ones affected by yesterday's tragic eruption on Whakaari / White Island. Since the eruption the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) has been coordinating the all-of-Government response to the eruption and ensuring that the focus is on keeping people and their welfare at the centre of the response. NEMA is currently supporting the Bay of Plenty Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group who are leading the response at the regional level. NEMA has also activated the National Coordination Centre to enable it to better coordinate the collective response and is working closely with other agencies including the Police Health the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Fire and Emergency New Zealand the New Zealand Defence Force and GNS. I'd like to add to the Prime Minister's words to acknowledge the courageous and dedicated work of our emergency services and first responders. We can all be extremely proud of their work.Rino Tirikatene: Who should people contact if their families are involved?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Again I acknowledge the grief and sorrow that those impacted will be feeling. Anyone who wishes to submit information regarding family and loved ones who might have been visiting Whakaari / White Island during the eruption should call Police on 105. People from overseas can call the number that's available on the Police website which is +64 9 105 105. And that information is available on the Police website.Rino Tirikatene: What should people in the area do?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: GNS have indicated that there is a 50 percent chance of another eruption in the next 24 hours so people do need to remain vigilant. They need to be aware of the potential for ash fall if that were to occur. In those circumstances they should consider staying indoors. Volcanic ash can be a health hazard especially if you suffer from breathing difficulties. We encourage people to listen to the radio television or other sources of information for further assessments and updates. Detailed safety advice will come from local authorities and emergency services in their area and people should act promptly on that advice.
Credit Contracts Legislation Amendment Bill — In Committee—Part 1
Young JonathanJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): Perhaps I can be the trifecta in asking the Minister to explain to us the interest rate cap because I'd have to say that back in 2014 when Minister Faafoi and I were both on the Commerce Committee we actually investigated this issue around interest rate caps. At that point in time I think we probably listened to officials and decided not to. I'd be very keen to hear what's changed because you know there are some consequences to interest rate caps which I think the officials would have given advice on if they'd been asked. Certainly we considered back in that period of time that when you have very small loans for very short periods of time yes the interest rates can appear to be high but if they don't have that higher interest rate then no lender would actually give that loan because there would be a detrimental cost to the lender at that particular point in time. So what would happen is that those small loans become unviable. Therefore they can't borrow. Therefore they either have to have longer loans or bigger loans and they end up borrowing more than is needed or for longer than is needed in order to actually transact some part of their life. So that creates a greater total cost and an ongoing burden.Certainly the National Party's point of view is that we do question the late insertion of the interest rate cap—as Andrew Falloon just said—of 0.8 percent a day into the bill and we are very keen to hear the Minister's response in terms of why it was introduced so late—and also as my colleague Brett Hudson made the comment when he asked officials what sort of advice they had given they stated to him they hadn't been asked for advice and they could therefore give no advice. Therefore we have to say this is a political insertion into the bill and we think it's actually counterproductive. We actually don't think it's going to work for those vulnerable lenders because it creates constriction into what they're able to borrow and they end up borrowing larger amounts for longer periods of time which does not work in their favour.So look as the third speaker asking this question to the Minister I leave it at that and perhaps the Minister could illuminate exactly the rationale. That would be most appreciated. Thank you.
Wood MichaelMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): As tempted as I am to speak about my experience of how effective it is to stroke back legs to get the desired outcome I wish to speak briefly about why this bill is an effective piece of public-good regulation. It's an effective piece of public-good regulation because it puts in place requirements that protect the broader public social and economic good. We know from the M. Bovis crisis just what the costs are of not having effective regulation in this area.It's an effective piece of public-good regulation because it puts everyone on a level playing field. It ensures that we don't just have some good guys doing the right thing while the cowboys go along down here and put everyone else at risk. It's an effective piece of public-good regulation because it gets the balance right. It puts in place good standards. But because we've had a good parliamentary process we've made sure that it's not too onerous.Public-good regulations sometimes get a bad rap but actually we have them for good reasons: to protect the public good and to make sure that our economy and our society are protected from risks that can have very serious consequences.I commend all colleagues who have contributed to this bill. I commend the Minister who's led this process. It hasn't been a simple piece of legislation but we've got a good result and it speaks to the value of public-good regulation. I commend the bill to the House.Bill read a third time.
National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading
Yule LawrenceLAWRENCE YULE (National—Tukituki): It's my pleasure to speak in favour of this third reading of the National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill (No 2). I think this whole issue came to light in the Mycoplasma bovis case earlier this year. It proved that in many cases the system was being rorted there was some compliance issues and there was actually a lack of response from the National Animal Identification and Tracing (NAIT) organisation. With a Minister sitting here in the House I commend him for getting us to this point.I also acknowledge what the Hon Amy Adams said previously in that there is a huge responsibility now on the organisation to make sure this works. I was speaking to some farmers last week who gave me stories—they didn't have a tag they rang up and it was quite a drama to get what they wanted. So there has to be a fundamental uplift in the system.I am very pleased that the transport operators have been listened to in this process. My colleague Hamish Walker talked about a stroppy stag. I've heard of raging bulls and other things that happen. As somebody that used to have a life on a farm it didn't happen very often but I would have animals arrive sometimes at midnight or sometimes we'd send animals to the South Island and it'd be loaded at 3 o'clock in the morning. There is no possible way—no possible way—you can see what that tag is at that time.For those people in this House that think it's somehow easy when you're loading animals in the dark it's actually quite a dangerous occupation. To get them into the pen you can't simply stroke their back leg and expect them to move; it doesn't happen. You have to give them a whipping—you have to give them a whipping. As a result of that we need to look after the people in the transport sector. I'm very happy to commend this bill to the House.
Wall LouisaLOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. It is my pleasure to stand in this the third reading of the National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill (No 2). I would like to congratulate Minister O'Connor and also the members of the Primary Production Committee. I am not a member of that committee but I can see the amount of work that has been done.In fact I essentially want to highlight that this national animal identification and tracing legislation was first introduced in 2012. It then actually wasn't fully implemented until February 2016. This bill is actually an outcome of a review that was already under way before M. bovis struck us as a country.In fact what this bill seeks to do is to improve the framework governing the National Animal Identification and Tracing system. Why do we want to do that? Because we want to provide for the rapid and accurate tracing of animals. It is also to enable biosecurity management and manage risks to human health. So this has been an incredibly important piece of legislation.I do want to note from what I've been able to determine that actually Federated Farmers in the end did support this piece of legislation. So I want to put it out there that this has been a consultative process.Just finally I think what I want to leave us with is that this legislation is actually fit for the future. Again I want to commend the Minister. I'm sure that within this area because we've had to learn a harsh lesson there'll be other reviews to make sure that this piece of legislation continues to be fit for many futures to come. Kia ora.
Radhakrishnan PriyancaPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. I too rise to take a very short call on this bill. However the changes that are made in this bill allow for the rapid and accurate tracing of animals and their movements that enable biosecurity management and—[Interruption]ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Order! Order members! I know this bill is exciting everyone but if could you just keep the volume down a little bit.PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Thank you Madam Speaker. I was talking about what a good bill this is and it's good for a number of reasons one of them being that we are a trade-reliant nation and the changes made in this bill will actually allow us to tell a story about where our food comes from the system of production and the ethical production of food that we export. While the changes might appear minor to some it actually allows us to tell that story and to significantly strengthen our trading relationships.I just very briefly want to say that these are changes that will ensure we can maintain our trading reputation and our economic interests. It is a good bill. I thank the Minister the Hon Damien O'Connor for his leadership members across the House and select committee officials who've been involved as well and I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
King Matt; Dyson RuthMATT KING (National—Northland): Thank you. I'll just take a second short call on the National Animal Identification and Tracing (NAIT) Amendment Bill (No 2) third reading. I'd like to acknowledge the class of 2017 in the back row here doing the hard yards late at night carrying this side of the House. I'd like to acknowledge them all and I'd also like to acknowledge the chair of the Primary Production Committee another brilliant man Dave Bennett.This NAIT bill is a good bill. I think during the Mycoplasma bovis scare it was found wanting as the term has been used. We set a review back in 2016 but I for one have personal experience with NAIT tags having NAIT-tagged about 2000—very hard to tag a flock of cows. Ha ha!—herd of cows. A couple of thousand NAIT tags I've put in animals over my time and I personally found it a very painful experience having fallen off the top of the yards and cracked my ribs during one of those sessions. That's how painful it was.But anyway look I'm only going to speak for a short time just to say isn't it great how in this House tonight we are powering through the legislation we are back and forth and everyone's working together? It's a pleasure to see. I like to see that there's cross-party support for this bill to help the farmers and to help rural New Zealand and our export economy. So I'm glad we're in the third reading. Everything has been well traversed and I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): This is a split call. I call Priyanca Radhakrishnan.
Sage EugenieHon EUGENIE SAGE (Minister of Conservation): Thank you Madam Speaker. Tēnā koe—pleased to take a call on the National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill (No 2). Responding to the previous speaker the Hon Amy Adams I think one of the key changes in the bill is that some of the things that are normal in an organisation in terms of their reporting to the Minister were not clear under the previous legislation. What the amendment bill does is implement some of those quite basic things so that the National Animal Identification and Tracing organisation which is responsible for administering and organising these regulatory services on behalf of the Crown does now have to more clearly report to the Minister on how they're spending their appropriation. There is a stronger ability for the Minister to set priorities so there will be a lot more accountability from the organisation to Government.As others have made the point Mycoplasma bovis showed just how wanting our system of tracking animal movements was. It is said that success has many fathers and failure is an orphan. There are a lot claiming responsibility for the bill but I think it is primarily with the current Minister Damien O'Connor because yes the previous Government did initiate the review but it is this Government that has gone on to actually make the changes so that we get a decent system in place for regulating animal movements and ensuring that they are recorded properly so that when we get a biosecurity outbreak they can be better tracked. The huge cost of Mycoplasma bovis—over a billion dollars to potentially eradicate it and the Crown is contributing over $470 million of that; a big opportunity cost for that money being spent on this when it could be spent on other areas of Government spending and huge costs to the rural community too in terms of the stress for individual farmers.So it is really important in this bill the much-improved infringement regime the much stronger penalties because they recognise the seriousness of not properly recording animal movement. Again under this Government there has been much more action in terms of infringements and proper policing so that we can lift the standard across the sector. There's the potential for other animal species like sheep to come into a similar system. I really acknowledge the work that everyone in the Primary Production Committee with officials has done and I acknowledge the Minister for Biosecurity.This bill is overdue. It's another example of this Government delivering to make sure that the billion-dollar export industry around primary products is more secure by having a good system to track animal movements to record them and ensure that there's a much more rapid response in terms of any biosecurity challenges. So thank you.
Tirikatene RinoRINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to speak at the final reading of this National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill (No 2). I want to congratulate Minister Damien O'Connor and our coalition Government for yet another very welcome piece of legislation which will enhance and further strengthen our biosecurity systems. This bill is a response to the Mycoplasma bovis outbreak. It's vitally important that we have a system of tracing and identification that is workable and that is there when we need it most. So I want to congratulate the Minister. Just to address Mr Bennett's point: the Minister came up with a very elegant solution around the ownership of data. Effectively no one owns the data but the Minister does have access to all of the information that is required to ensure that the operations of the Act can run smoothly at all times and I want to acknowledge the Minister for coming up with that elegant solution. With that I commend this bill to the House.
Lubeck MarjaMARJA LUBECK (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. Yes it was correct: as the previous speaker said I was settling in for a 10-minute speech and giving it a good go but in the meantime everything has been said. So on that note I commend this bill to the House.Bill read a third time.
Farm Debt Mediation Bill (No 2) — Third Reading
Yule LawrenceLAWRENCE YULE (National—Tukituki): Mr Speaker what I just witnessed from the chief whip of the Labour Party was quite extraordinary: Marja Lubeck primed up to give her speech and the whip just stands up and steals her thunder—didn't even look round.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Actually it's the Speaker who decides upon who speaks OK?LAWRENCE YULE: My apologies Mr Speaker. Anyway I observed; it wouldn't happen on our side—it wouldn't happen on our side.Look we are supporting this bill because we support early intervention. We think that a mediated outcome in distressed situations is absolutely the way to go. I also note that both the Reserve Bank and the banks that have been public on this have supported this as an approach and we're happy to do it on this side as well.If I can make the observation though—and I did this the other day—it's a consternation really in respect of Mark Patterson because the debt in the rural sector is currently around $63 billion which is a lot of money and there is record high commodity prices and I hope dairy prices go to something with an eight in front of them but there are around 200 farms according to the Reserve Bank Governor last week at the select committee that are in major trouble—major major trouble. And whether that average debt is $10 million it's of significance and one of the things that this Government is responsible for is changing the overseas investment laws to the point where international companies cannot purchase some of those distressed assets. The net result of that—Hon Members: Good job too!LAWRENCE YULE: You might say that's a good thing. The Ministers over there do think it's a good thing. The net result of that is there are limited options for sales of these large properties who are very indebted and the risk with that is it gets transferred across the whole sector in a loss of value. So we're happy to support this. It is a way through and early intervention is always a good intervention. We're happy to support this bill.
Wood MichaelMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): The preceding speaker Tim van de Molen may feel that this bill is a solution looking for a problem but as I look across the Chamber I can see a number of problems looking for a solution. I think that might come around in about November of next year.I want to swing on to a more positive note though as the member who's able to conclude the debate on this bill to commend my colleague Mark Patterson on whose initiative this bill commenced its legislative journey and to commend all members all around the House in a spirit of a cross-partisan approach for supporting this bill on its way. It is a good bill that does address a real issue which is the significant stress that farmers often face because of the debt that they have to undertake as a part of their business and the challenges that they can face in a very dynamic and difficult environment at times.It's a practical bill; it doesn't solve all of the problems in the rural sector that farmers sometimes face but it will make a real difference. And on this side of the House we are proud to be a Government that addresses the needs of all New Zealanders including rural New Zealanders and this bill is a part of that. I commend the bill to the House.
van de Molen TimTIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato): Thank you Mr Speaker. The Farm Debt Mediation Bill (No 2)—well here we are: the third reading. This is an interesting piece of legislation that on the face of it has broad support and understandably so. It's pretty benign to be honest in terms of what it's trying to achieve. New Zealand First have created another solution looking for a problem in large respect but there are some aspects to it that have some merit. In particular the key part of that that I think is relevant here is around creating a mechanism that enables mediation to occur not just between a borrower a farmer in this instance and the lender being a mainstream bank but actually between the farmer and whatever that lender might be whether it's a third party or a second- or third-tier lender or a family group or some other related entity that is not a mainstream bank.The mainstream banks typically have pretty robust processes in terms of working through challenging scenarios with their farming clients and try to pre-empt that as much as possible for the clients' benefit but of course for the banks benefit as well; there's reputational risk if things don't go well for a client. And so unsurprisingly they contribute significant investment to making sure they work through that process. The real opportunity in this bill is actually providing that more detailed mechanism for those that aren't in a corporate environment like that who don't have those structures around them to work through these processes. In those situations there does need to be some clearer pathways to work through the challenges presented by whatever particular issues the farmer might be facing that means they are unable to meet their obligations from a financial perspective.So on that note we support those aspects of it in particular. There is some good work there but again broadly as I mentioned it's a solution looking for a problem. New Zealand First started it off the Government's picked it up and good on them for doing something. There are some good aspects to it. At the end of day we're seeing more and more need for mitigating issues financially in the rural sector and that's largely driven off some of the change in policies we're seeing under this Government—a significant reduction in business confidence in the farming sector. Farmers in particular are looking very concerned at where the future is for them and wanting to see a bit of clarity. So this can potentially fill that gap a bit and so we do support it.
Webb DuncanDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Kia ora Mr Speaker. Look this is a good bill and it has been improved in the select committee but can I just really point out that the merits of this bill are that it's looking for a non-adversarial process to assist parties through a very difficult time. Mediation is a great alternative to genuine outright conflict. That's essentially the centrepiece of this bill. It means that people won't have to have recourse to the courts which don't work for everyone.Hon David Parker: You call yourself a lawyer?Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Thank you Mr Parker. Look it's a fantastic step forward far overdue and I hope we see this in a whole lot of other areas as well. I commend this bill to the House.
King Matt; Rurawhe AdrianMATT KING (National—Northland): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'll speak very briefly on the Farm Debt Mediation Bill (No 2). Being a farmer myself I know a lot of farmers around my area are heavily indebted. The only time that they ever have any money is when they sell up and retire. So any sort of a bill like this that can help in keeping people on farms and keeping people farming we support.Now this bill started off as a very poorly drafted flawed New Zealand First member's bill. The original bill has been substantially improved by the sheer brilliance of the chair David Bennett and the work that he did—incredible incredible incredible guy—through the committee process and the feedback. I know that there were 30-odd submissions and the select committee process really works if you do it properly. It was great to see this bill go through that process and actually get improved unlike the fiasco of last week—the fiasco of last week—when there was no select committee under urgency and what did we get? We got a bill that's a Clayton's bill. So it's good to see that this has gone through.Federated Farmers support it. The bankers supported it. There is a large amount of debt in this country—$62.8 billion—and that's increased by 270 percent over the last 20 years. So anything that makes it easier for farmers to keep farming we support. I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Members this is a split call. I call Dr Duncan Webb—five minutes.
Sage EugenieHon EUGENIE SAGE (Minister of Conservation): Thank you Mr Speaker kia ora. I'm pleased to take a call on the Farm Debt Mediation Bill (No 2) as the primary industries spokesperson for the Green Party having succeeded Gareth Hughes. It was interesting at the Canterbury A&P Show last month just having a conversation with an arable and dry stock farmer. He was talking about how eight years ago he had been pushed hard by his bank to convert to dairying to get higher returns. He had resisted that and now he is very glad that he had resisted because he didn't have the level of debt that he would have had if he had converted. That is one of the big issues in the farm sector: the significant levels of stress in rural communities that are associated with the very high levels of debt of around $63 billion.So this bill is a very good one because it does provide for a structured and impartial and confidential mediation process to work through debt problems and it provides—as the Hon Amy Adams noted—for that processes to be initiated before any enforcement action is taken by banks or secured creditors. So it's a way of ensuring that given the complexities of farm businesses that Mark Patterson alluded to the quite complex issues around debt can actually be worked through—to look at the options to look at whether exiting from the farm and doing that in a dignified way and wrapping up all of the loose ends in that can occur.The bill has had very wide support from lenders because of the timely and transparent process that it provides for. I commend the work that New Zealand First has done in getting the bill to the House the work the Minister has done and the work the select committee has done with officials in improving it. It is providing for a scheme that I think is a light touch and with low cost. I think it's going to cost about $350000 to set up and about that much annually to run keeping the costs down to those who use it. It will become effective next February and come into full effect next October.I think this is another example of where this Government is providing really practical support for farmers really grappling with this issue of high levels of debt the significant stress that that imposes and the need for better support for farmers to work through those debt issues. I commend the bill to the House.
Walker HamishFARM DEBT MEDIATION BILL (NO 2)Third ReadingDebate resumed from 5 December.HAMISH WALKER (National—Clutha-Southland): This bill will establish a farm debt mediation scheme which requires creditors with security interests in farms to basically offer mediation to farmers before taking enforcement action in relation to that debt and allow farmers basically an early option to get involved in sorting out that debt. Often there's quite a bit of a power imbalance between farmers and banks. Banks have huge debt departments once farmers get into trouble. But this bill at the end of the day is there for farmers. There's been a huge amount of debt increase over the last several years—I believe 270 percent; around about $63 billion compared to 20 years ago.I just want to acknowledge that this bill started out a couple of times back in the 1990s with New Zealand First. I believe Darroch Ball pulled it out of the box and then transferred it to my good parliamentary colleague Mark Patterson—good work Mark on this. Mark and I had a very entertaining Sunday together. We were both dressed part way up as Santa in the Gore Santa parade throwing out lollies to kids. We both did a good job of throwing out the lollies and not getting them in anyone's eyes.But back to this bill; this is a good bill for rural New Zealand. The objectives of the bill are rather simple: it's to help farmers in financial distress and promote turn-around solutions early on to give farmers the best possible chance of getting out without losing their farms. Owning a farm is a little bit different than say owning a residential home. A farm produces income but often you've got the family farmhouse on the farm. It's similar to say a dairy that has a culmination above the dairy. This bill doesn't go quite that far; it just sticks with the rural aspect. But we also consider this debt mediation bill another mechanism to keeping those banks honest.Throughout the select committee process we heard 30 written submissions and oral evidence from 18 submitters. We heard from farmers. We heard from some of the banks who are all in agreement that this is a good bill. We heard some devastating stories from farmers who have been through this; they've lost everything and they were speaking very positively towards this bill.Just one clause I'd like to speak about briefly is clause 9A(2) and (3) which is most of the provisions from clause 58 as introduced. These relate to an appointment of an administrator or receiver under the Companies Act. However we recommend deleting clause 58(2)(c) of the bill as introduced which relates to the appointment of a liquidator under section 241 of the Companies Act. This provision is unnecessary as a creditor is unable to make an appointment and an application for an order to appoint a liquidator will be covered in clause 9A(3).Can I lastly just acknowledge the different members on the Primary Production Committee. We do work well together. We've got a very fair and balanced chair in David Bennett who's appreciated from all sides of the House; a huge amount of respect built up over the last two years. On that we support the bill. I commend it to the House.
Webb DuncanDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Kia ora e Te Mana Whakawā. This is socialism in action and it is our own indigenous socialism and it's the best kind. I won't take long because it doesn't take long to sing the praises of this Government because they are so obvious. There are only five things I want to say. At last we've got a Government who will bring all of infrastructure together and won't make a piecemeal approach. We'll put transport housing infrastructure and waste water all together because that's what we need to do. Secondly this is genuine streamlining through special development areas and specified development projects that we can really get on with and make a real difference for ordinary hard-working New Zealanders. Thirdly there will be real community consultation here real engagement and not just engagement with vested interests but with communities on the ground. Fourthly—and really importantly—there will be genuine protection of Māori interests Māori engagement and special protection of Māori customary land so that we can ensure that Māori can meet their aspirations in respect of housing needs. Lastly there is the ability to acquire land and put it to best use so it isn't speculated on and land-banked—for the people; not for land bankers and speculators. This bill is an outstanding achievement for this Government. I commend it to the House. Bill read a first time. Bill referred to the Environment Committee.
Urban Development Bill — First Reading
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): Oh thank you very much Mr Speaker. I remember a time when this Government used to come to the House and speak positively about their bills. They would come down Minister after Minister and speak for 10-minute calls and fill up the House for hours on end and now they've run out of steam. They've given up. They're not even confident enough to come down and back their own bills. And the gall to have Mark Patterson stand up there tonight and say Oh yeah we need to free up land."! It's like Back to the Future because this Government actually had a proven formula and it was called the rebuild after the Canterbury earthquakes because what we learnt in the Greater Christchurch region was that if you free up land it increases supply which equals demand. The issue is not about building the houses because they learnt that—that failed socialist experiment called KiwiBuild. Now we took Simon Bridges into a development in my electorate where we had private builders building next to KiwiBuild a four double-bedroom internal garage high-spec house. They were selling cheaper than KiwiBuild. This is what that party does in Opposition. The failure of a Labour Government is that when they're in Opposition their only catchcry is "Get us in Government and we'll solve it." They don't know how to and they have no plan but all they say is "Get us in Government." Then you have Phil Twyford the housing Minister who turns up and says "Well if it was that easy the last Government would have done it." Well that's exactly the point—that's why we said it was not easy. It was a complex issue but they made it a big issue. They said housing was their No. 1 one issue and here we are two years in and we're at the first reading of the Urban Development Bill. They're so confident of their own bill that they have been drafting for two long years and they turn up and speak for five or 10 seconds as their contribution. They are learning. This Government is a social experiment that is failing and the real people that are going to be affected by this are hard-working New Zealanders. In fact they had the formula. They knew from Canterbury—from the experience there—that the housing affordability issue was not to do with the cost of housing; it was to do with the cost of land. Here we finally have it the "Back to the Future Bill" that finally acknowledges that that was the issue. It's taken two years—two years—in the year of delivery. They can get meat plastics banned before they can do anything about housing affordability. This Government is a failed socialist experiment."
Lubeck MarjaMARJA LUBECK (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker for the opportunity just to take a very short call following on from Tim van de Molen the person who basically used a lot of words to say that they agree with what we're doing. So I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
van de Molen TimTIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato): Thank you Mr Speaker. I find it's quite an interesting change in direction that the Government's taking with their approach to legislation tonight—merely contributing a manner of a few seconds per call. It's quite a change from the tack they've taken over the last wee while where they've been filibustering consistently their own legislation with clearly no pipeline of work ahead of them. But now I guess with Christmas in sight they've stuffed the Order Paper or Christmas stocking as it may be with enough bills to tide them over in the hope that the officials will do the rest of the work in January while they're all on holiday. So here we are on this Urban Development Bill at first reading—Kāinga Ora. In principle it's not a bad idea and it actually makes up for the fact that the Government came riding in on their high horse claiming to be about to solve the housing crisis. They'd build 100000 homes and KiwiBuild would be the saviour for all and sundry and away we'd go—sunshine lollipops and unicorns. But in reality it's proved to be much more difficult than they'd anticipated. I suppose after nine years in the wilderness they've kind of lost touch with how to do these things and when they actually got the opportunity they found there were many complex elements that were beyond what they had anticipated initially. So consequently we've seen KiwiBuild fail miserably. Now we're seeing the Resource Management Act (RMA) reform which was actually a significant piece of work that does need to be done. In Opposition the National Party is working hard on that and we will have a comprehensive solution or proposal for that. But what we're seeing this time from the Government now is that they have realised there does need to be some change to the RMA but actually they have set up another working group kicked the can down the road and then they don't have to deal with it before the election. So this is a temporary option to try and demonstrate that they are doing something but actually it's not much. However the bones of it are not bad. So on that basis we are prepared to support it at its first reading to get it to select committee to try and kick it into a better shape and to help this Government out yet again with their failed legislation pipeline.
Kanongata'a-Suisuiki Anahila; Rurawhe AdrianANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour): Kia ora e Te Mana Whakawā. He pire tino mīharo tēnei kua tautoko au i tēnei pire ki Te Whare. Kia ora. [Greetings Mr Speaker. This is a marvellous bill; I support this bill to the House. Thank you.] ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Tim van de Molen—five minutes.
Lee Denise; Rurawhe AdrianDENISE LEE (National—Maungakiekie): Thank you very much Mr Speaker. We do on this side of the House see the value in the approach that the Government's taking with this particular Urban Development Bill but we have reservations. So if Eugenie Sage the previous speaker wonders why we support—and then I think she used the term grumpy". We're grumpy because that's exactly our role—to make sure that we interrogate all matters of every piece of legislation. There are some aspects where we will be grumpy about it and rightly so because we need to make sure we get this right. So we've got a baseline position of sending this to a select committee making sure that we understand exactly what the tool kit of powers is that is being given over to Kāinga Ora and then we will enjoy seeing how different submissions and different stakeholders and groups come to the process and outline their positive comments and also where they see challenges. Now on the challenges there are four reservations that I'll just quickly highlight. Some of them are coming from initial responses from stakeholders. Some of them are probably more from our side of the tracks but none the less they'll be four areas we would like to see and interrogate in the select committee process. The first is that the process for establishing an SDP which is a specified development project is lengthy. So we want assurances and then to look around for how that could be actually streamlined further. It's one thing to agree on these SPVs—the special purpose vehicles—being created but it's another to actually take a long time to get it created. The other is that private developers could be consulted more or actually at all during the initial assessment stage to get that industry buy-in. That's another issue that could be looked at and interrogated more. The third would be looking at how it bypasses smaller developers. If we're really looking at a comprehensive response to housing in New Zealand where and how could smaller developers be included? Then the other would be—and I think the Government should stump up with this—is this really just a way of avoiding Resource Management Act (RMA) reform? Where is the evidence around RMA reform in a considered approach to that because we know there's not one answer. It's not just about this particular bill. There's also RMA reform sorely needed and we'd love to see the Government's time line on that. We're supporting this bill through to the next stage. Thank you Mr Speaker. If the aim is for certainty simplicity and for a coordinated approach then we do need to see some other answers. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): This is a split call."
Patterson MarkMARK PATTERSON (NZ First): It's a pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First on this Urban Development Bill as we look to enable Kāinga Ora to lead some of these large master-planned developments where we can turn some of these brownfield and greyfield sites into much-needed housing. One of the great handicaps that we've come into in this Government is a housing crisis and we've needed to take some pretty bold steps and try some things. Some things have worked better than others obviously but we need almost a Think Big - type arrangement. It's almost the second coming of Muldoon this sort of stuff with cutting through some process and getting on with building some houses. A lot of the root cause of a lot of our social ills is the fact that we haven't got enough good houses affordable houses. It's the absolute foundation stone of our society. So we need to bring some measures in. Of course the Productivity Commission has done number of reports. It's identified our having an urban development authority like this as a key plank to ramping up our housing. Of course we've got a record number of consents and building going on out there at the moment which is great but we've got so much catch-up to do. So there's some 30-year planning going on here—long overdue—and it's a wee bit galling to sit back and listen to this woulda shoulda coulda" over there. We're actually getting on and doing it and getting these big master-plan developments up where you're looking at things like the three waters and transport hubs and looking at the whole package as we look to futureproof our cities. There are a lot of powers in this so the select committee will have some work to do—the power to levy local residents for example. Councils will be very interested and I'm sure they will be submitting on this through Local Government New Zealand. So New Zealand First will be looking forward to seeing how that all plays out but this is a great enabler for the Government to get on and continue to fix our housing crisis. Thank you."
McAnulty KieranKIERAN McANULTY (Labour): That was a poor speech from Judith Collins. But this is a great bill and I commend it to the House.
Maritime Transport (Offshore Installations) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
Hudson BrettBRETT HUDSON (National): It's a pleasure to rise and support the Maritime Transport (Offshore Installations) Amendment Bill in this its second reading. A very sensible and quite necessary measure it is. Not only should we support world's best practice in terms of exploration but we should—and do—have a regulatory framework which is focused very much around preventing hazards and discharges. We do need to make sure that in the event—although it's a low probability—of a spillage or of environmental damage the polluters are responsible for dealing with the mess and effects that they have brought about whether that is done by an act or an omission or by some other means. So with the bill not only being very clear about that liability but the need for the potentially liable party to have insurance to cover that we give very strong clarity to the explorer about their obligations but we give a lot more confidence and certainty to New Zealanders that in permitting these sorts of activities of offshore oil exploration should adverse consequences arise from those activities we have the means to ensure that the damage to the environment is both contained and addressed and that the liability for that rests solely with the party who is held responsible for it. So it's a sensible measure and it is something that was initiated under the previous Government as so many of the sensible measures that have passed in this term were. But it's well worth doing and we commend it to the House. Bill read a second time.