edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
SpeechTODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise to take a short call on the Māori Fisheries Amendment Bill first reading concluding this evening.As it is the first time that I have spoken in this House since the loss of Chester Borrows can I also add my condolences to his family. Chester was a remarkable person who was the personification of service for his community and service regardless of need and social position—he was there for everyone. The genuine outpouring of grief from his community reflects the respect and mana in which he was held.I don't intend to speak for long on this bill. The review that was required by the Maori Fisheries Act in 2004 which specifically said that a review had to be carried out no later than the 11th year following the commencement of that original Act—well it happened at the 11th year and the review was finalised in March 2015. So eight years on and here we are at the point of having the legislation committed to a select committee that we are assuming perhaps is the Māori Affairs Committee but it's not entirely—Arena Williams: Yes.TODD MULLER: It is?Arena Williams: Yes.TODD MULLER: Acting Madam Chair it was very good to see you in full flight this morning chairing the Māori Affairs Committee. You looked very comfortable in that position. I suspect you should stay there but that's just a personal view. But anyway I have had that confirmed it is going to the Māori Affairs Committee so Harete Hipango that's good news from our perspective.So this review was carried out. It obviously followed then eight years of extensive iwi engagement to land this proposal which of course needs to see the original Act amended to give effect to it. As discussed already tonight essentially the bill amends the mandated iwi organisations and their asset holding companies to take more direct control of Te Ohu Kai Moana and Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd and that changes the governance arrangements accordingly and changes the status of shares within that structure and some surpluses will then have to be settled accordingly. So there is a debate as to how best to do that and this legislation has suggested it is a one vote per iwi basis. So we will see in the select committee process whether that indeed does have widespread support. It'll be interesting to see how that debate in particular unfolds but it makes sense.The fisheries in New Zealand I think are a remarkable export story. In particular Māori interests in our commercial fisheries have become so strong and impressive in their commercial performance over the last 15 years or so and I think it is an understated story of New Zealand agriculture. We should focus and celebrate the collective contribution they make not only in New Zealand export receipts but also in terms of the communities in which they operate.So this is as discussed already tonight not particularly complex although it has had a long gestation. We look forward to it being discussed and debated in the Māori Affairs Committee and it has the support of the National Party to proceed through that process.
SpeechGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth): Kia ora Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to be here this evening and as I begin this speech to recognise Jamie Tuuta who's a member of my community—or probably Barbara Kuriger's community more noted—but in terms of our Urenui the chair of Ngāti Mutunga but also recently appointed as the chair of Sealord Group which is obviously a significant role here in Aotearoa in terms of fisheries around our coastlines.This piece of legislation is simple. I guess we've traversed any conversations about it over the last few days in terms of what it does and the reason for it so I'm going to keep my comments short. But of course it's around ensuring that iwi have a greater degree of rangatiratanga over their fisheries which is something that is significant and important. When we think of rangatiratanga it's around that leadership—or it's around that autonomy to make decisions; it's around self-determination when it comes to the spaces in terms of fisheries.Secondly we look at this legislation and last year I had the privilege of being on the Primary Production Committee when we debated when we went through the process of looking at the Fisheries Amendment Bill which is now the Act. So I note as well we continue the process; we continue progress in terms of strengthening modernising New Zealand's fisheries management system. I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechANNA LORCK (Labour—Tukituki): Thank you. I just cannot trust the National Party on tax—I can't—because when the National Party were pitching up that they were going to do tax cuts when they were going to come in and win an election and they said that they would cut tax—they came in and guess what they did! What did they do? They increased GST. They said they weren't going to but they did. They increased GST to 15 percent. They love tax. The National Government loved tax. They like to tax and tax and tax. They do tax everything they say about trying to think—or any New Zealander who seems to want to believe that the National Government won't tax you the National Government will tax. Then they try and say that they are going to drop taxes but they will drop taxes on the rich. Mark my words—mark my words—it will be tax tax tax by the National Government if they ever get in because they want to make income as well. Don't sit across there and say that you don't like to tax because the National Government did tax. They said they weren't going to increase GST and oh yes they did; they put it up 2.5 percent—15 percent. And they have the gall to turn around and think that they can take this app tax" and not mention not once that there is a rebate—a rebate for those who are not registered for GST who may b. & b. their family home or their bach. So it's all talk from the National Party—it's all talk because they seem to think that the people of New Zealand will believe them. But you cannot trust them. You cannot trust National ever when it comes to tax because they are on the record they said they wouldn't increase tax and lo and behold the moment they got into Government that is exactly what they did.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Order! Order! Would the member come back to this bill. Thank you.ANNA LORCK: Yes Madam Speaker. Well we're talking about tax and I like talking about tax. I just want to say that when it comes to GST and the proportion of GST that should be paid by those overseas businesses that have apps and make money out of New Zealanders they should contribute to the tax system.But as I finish my speech I just need to reiterate that you can't say one thing and then do the other. When it comes to tax the National Government loves it. I commend this bill to the House."
SpeechJAMIE STRANGE (Labour—Hamilton East): Thank you Madam Speaker. I appreciate the opportunity to take an unexpected call on this bill tonight. Look there is a saying that goes It's important to be on the right side of history." It's important to look forward and say "Is this the right thing to do?" As a Government we believe it is the right thing to do in terms of fairness. I'm disappointed to see the Opposition are opposing this bill. Nicola Grigg: You're leaving cos you saw the poll.JAMIE STRANGE: Now I'm sure that members including the member opposite who's being very vocal there—I'm sure that members have spent time in a taxi often leaving Parliament on the way to the airport and they've had a conversation similar to this. The conversation goes: "Back in 2016 the previous National Government the Hon Simon Bridges Minister of Transport he allowed Uber to have free rein." It sort of goes something like that. And then the taxi driver then goes on to say "Look you see Uber don't have to have these sort of regulations. They don't have to have this they don't have to have that. They don't pay tax." Now this conversation has come up many times and it's always ended in the same way. I think deep down the National Party regret giving Uber free rein back when they brought that in. I see the member Michael Woodhouse smiling but I think deep down they know that they made a mistake. I believe they're about to make a mistake again. It's still not too late. It's still not too late to quickly text Christopher Luxon and say "Look can we change our mind on this? We're on the wrong side of history." Maybe that's for them to think about but we are a Government who believe in fairness in the tax system. There is no doubt that there is a gap here in policy and we're filling it. I commend this bill to the House."
Robertson GrantPARLIAMENTARY SERVICE COMMISSIONMembershipHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Leader of the House): I move That under section 15(1)(d) of the Parliamentary Service Act 2000 Tangi Utikere be appointed as a member of the Parliamentary Service Commission.It's been agreed by the Business Committee that this will be the only speech on this motion. Its purpose is to briefly explain the process behind the appointment. The Parliamentary Service Commission was created by the Parliamentary Service Act 2000 to be the main source of advice to the Speaker on the nature of services to be provided to the House and its members and on directions relating to the allocation and administration of funding. The membership of the commission is determined by the Act. It consists of the Speaker the Leader of the House the Leader of the Opposition or their nominee and an additional member of each party represented in the House nominated by motion—but no Minister can be nominated as one of these additional members. By convention the second representative of the leading Government party is the senior whip which brings me to the nomination of Tangi Utikere.Tangi was elected as the member of Parliament for Palmerston North in 2020 but he had a life prior to that. He served a term as the Deputy Mayor of Palmerston North a job highly sought after across the land and one that he fulfilled to a very very high standard. As his colleagues can attest his experience as a teacher at Freyberg High School certainly comes in handy in the role of Government whip as I'm sure the Opposition whips would indicate too. He has already proved himself in the role to be effective and efficient—and efficient and efficient!—and he is a person who has shown that not only through his role as a whip but also in his chairpersonship of the Health Committee.I was informed earlier today of two things about Mr Utikere that I didn't know. The first of those is that he is a marriage celebrant. So should there be anyone around the place looking for somebody to do that for them I'm sure Tangi would be very very obliging in that regard. The second was from an informant who shall remain unnamed Rachel Boyack who attended Ross Intermediate School in Palmerston North with Mr Utikere several years ago—we won't say how many that was—who informs me that her memory of Mr Utikere was that he was The one who was always called up to thank the visitors who came to the school." And that fellow members of Parliament tells you all you need to know about the kind of person that Tangi Utikere is. He will be a valuable source of wisdom and advice as a member of the Parliamentary Service Commission and I commend this motion to the House.Motion agreed to."
Potaka TamaTAMA POTAKA (National—Hamilton West): Tēnā tātou. E te Kaiārahi tēnā koe pō manahau ki a tātou katoa. E tika ana te tautoko i ngā poroaki o te wā ki ngā mate o te wā me ngā mihi ngā iwi e pēhia ana i te tāruke a Tāwhirimātea.Ka nui hoki te whakamīharo ki te rongo ki ngā kōrero nunui pahupahu roroa hoki e pā ana ki te whakatau a te Pirīmia. Ka pai hoki kei te mihi hoki ki ngā whakaaro katoa ahakoa tautoko au kāore au i te tautoko e mihi ana. He mana nui tō te tūranga Pirīmia te tūranga Pirīmia me tōna tinana hou e whakakī nei i ērā hū nui. Nā reira e mihi ana ki a ia engari tāku e whakatūpato ana i tēnei wā.Me āta whakaarohia ētahi o ngā mahi e whai kaha ana te Kāwanatanga ā te marama me te tau te tū nei. Ki tō mātou te rahinga me te nuinga o ngā tāngata e noho ana ki Kirikiriroa ki te Uru e rua ngā kaupapa matua e pāngia ki a ngāi mātou o Kirikiriroa ki te Uru. Tuatahi ko te utu oranga te utu ora rānei kātahi. Koirā e whakatāmi nei e kaha nei ki te āta whakapēhi i ngā whānau o Kirikiriroa ki te Uru. Ehara i te kaupapa poka noa hanganoa koretake noa rānei engari koirā tētahi o ngā mānuka wero take nunui o te wā.Tuarua ko te mahi hangarau koirā ētahi o ngā tāngata e whai hikareti ana e whai moni ana ki ngā toa me ngā rārangi toa o Kirikiriroa ki te Uru. Ki a au nei me tahuri te kei o te waka o te taukī a te Pirīmia ki ngā whānau e pēhia ana e ēnei take e rua o te wā.Tēnā tātou katoa.[Greetings one and all. To the Speaker greetings and a good evening to everyone. It is appropriate at this time to farewell the dead of this time and acknowledge the people badly affected by the high winds Cyclone Gabrielle.It is amazing to hear the many comments and the lengthy banter related to the Prime Minister's statement. It is good and I also acknowledge all the ideas. Whether I support them or not I acknowledge them. The role of Prime Minister holds much prestige and the new Prime Minister has huge shoes to fill. And so I acknowledge him but with a caveat at this time.We must carefully think about the work that the Government is ardently pursuing in the coming month and year. For many of us including the majority of residents in Hamilton West there are two main issues affecting us in Hamilton West.Firstly the cost of living. That is putting pressure on and strongly impacting the families of Hamilton West. It is not a random inconsequential or unimportant issue. It is one of the major current challenges.Secondly there is the criminal activity by those seeking cigarettes and cash from the shops and rows of shops in Hamilton West. To me we must change direction of the Prime Minister's statement to address the families impacted by these two current issues. Greetings one and all.]
Rurawhe AdrianPoint of Order—Scope of Supplementary QuestionsHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Point of order Mr Speaker. Thank you Mr Speaker. When you review question time I think you'll note that at question Nos 3 6 and 11 members of Government benches asked questions of Ministers that commenced with Can the Minister confirm" followed by matters seeking to inject information or propaganda as described in Speakers' rulings 183/7(1) and (2). It would be helpful to know whether or not those Speakers' rulings still stand. SPEAKER: I'll come back to you."
Rurawhe AdrianPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: A petition has been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.CLERK: Petition of Andrew Wilson requesting that the House amend Schedule 4 Part 7 clause 8 of the Social Security Act 2018 urban-rural statistical blocks so that urban-rural zoning for the purposes of Accommodation Supplement eligibility is based on the most recent population statistics.SPEAKER: That petition stands referred to the Petitions Committee. No papers have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. No select committee reports have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. No bills have been introduced.
Visitors — Norway—Parliament Committee on Education and Research
Rurawhe AdrianVISITORSNorway—Norwegian ParliamentSPEAKER: I'm sure that members would wish to welcome Hege Bae Nyholt Chair of the Norwegian Parliament Committee on Education and Research and her accompanying delegation who are present in the gallery.
O'Connor GregWEDNESDAY 8 MARCH 2023The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSGREG O'CONNOR (Deputy Speaker): Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom justice mercy and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Tuesday 7 March 2023 - Volume 766
Criminal Activity Intervention Legislation Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Criminal Activity Intervention Legislation Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 108New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 12Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 108New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 12Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
9. Question No. 9—HealthDr ANAE NERU LEAVASA (Labour—Takanini) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 9—Health9. Dr ANAE NERU LEAVASA (Labour—Takanini) to the Minister of Health: How is the Government supporting mental wellbeing for people affected by the cyclone?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): Last week I announced an additional $3.2 million in reprioritised funding to support the immediate wellbeing needs of people impacted by Cyclone Gabrielle. The personal recovery for those who have lost loved ones livelihoods and homes to Cyclone Gabrielle is going to be incredibly tough. This Government will continue to stand alongside those in New Zealand experiencing hardship and they will make sure they're not doing it alone. Dr Anae Neru Leavasa: What services will be available to people impacted by Cyclone Gabrielle?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: The funding allows for an expansion of the All Sorts mental wellbeing campaign which supports communities with tools to look after each other's wellbeing. We're bringing in a team of mental health workers to offer local support to those most impacted by the cyclone and Te Aka Whai Ora the Māori Health Authority is designing a Māori-led response to support Te Ao Māori mental wellbeing solutions.Dr Anae Neru Leavasa: What specific measures are being taken for isolated communities?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: We are supporting isolated communities in a number of ways. As well as free face-to-face services we're also supporting a range of free telehealth and digital services for those unable to travel to services. There have been pamphlets hand delivered along with aid by civil defence in the worst-affected areas. The pamphlets include information on free wellbeing supports that are available and wellbeing tips for those cut off from all communication. There is also additional mental health staff arriving in Hawke's Bay and Tai Rāwhiti to take pressure off local providers and ensure that current and emerging needs are met.Dr Anae Neru Leavasa: How does this additional funding support the existing mental health programmes?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Over the last five years we've built a primary mental healthcare system from the ground up. Over 2.6 million people are now covered through primary care providers and over 670000 sessions have already been delivered. In Hawke's Bay since Cyclone Gabrielle those working in the primary-care mental health service have been making proactive calls to people who are isolated or have long-term conditions checking on welfare and normalising conversations about emotions and mental wellbeing.
8. Question No. 8—EducationERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 8—Education8. ERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays) to the Minister of Education: Does she agree with the reported statistical analysis carried out by the New Zealand Council for Educational Research into the NCEA Literacy and Numeracy pilot that found that the assessments performed well and does she stand by her statement in September that she is absolutely not" considering making the tests easier?Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Education): Yes and yes.Erica Stanford: Why then just one month after she said she is "absolutely not" making the tests easier did the Ministry of Education officials write to New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) requesting that they use easier words fewer questions and let students use a spellcheck?Hon JAN TINETTI: Because I consider that—I expect that my officials consider all evidence that's put in front of them. I also expect experts in their field would disagree on evidence and analysis from time to time. I expect robust discussions to happen between agencies in this area.Erica Stanford: Is spelling a foundational literacy skill and does allowing the use of spellcheck to assess basic foundational literacy make the literacy test easier or harder?Hon JAN TINETTI: The member is referring to some advice that was given through to a document. That is not advice that I have personally read. It may have been sent to my office in a no surprises before the release but I have not personally seen that so I cannot comment on it.Erica Stanford: Given the answer that the Minister just gave to this House shouldn't she be aware of her officials' advice going to NZQA and who is running the Ministry of Education—is it her or her officials?Hon JAN TINETTI: As I've said I expect the experts to work through that information to have those robust discussions. Final advice hasn't come through to me at this stage. I await that further advice."
SpeechANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Tēnā koe Madam Speaker. I'm delighted to stand and speak in support of the Māori Fisheries Amendment Bill. It's an exciting bill. It's a bill that's overdue. The regulatory impact statement says very clearly that everyone involved is keen. I commend it to the House.
SpeechSORAYA PEKE-MASON (Labour): It pleases me to take a call on the first reading of the Māori Fisheries Amendment Bill. As mentioned the objective of the bill is to make sure iwi have greater degree of rangatiratanga over their fisheries assets to improve benefits for Māori reduce costs and strengthen efficiencies.Rangatiratanga upholds sovereignty and self-determination for whānau hapū and iwi. I have seen this in action at a flax-roots level at home through access to kai moana by uri o Te Awa Tupua kāhui maunga ki Tangaroa [seafood by descendants of the Whanganui River from the mountains to the sea]. This bill will go further to strengthening those benefits for uri across the motu.I want to go back just a little and touch on the history by acknowledging Sir Archie Te Atawhai Taiaroa. He was the former chair of Te Ohu Kai Moana the Māori Fisheries Commission; a commission board member from 1993; and a chair from 2006 to 2009. He and other leaders at the time were driven to putting the 700 million Māori fisheries resource to work on behalf of Māoridom. In the 1992 Fisheries Deed of Settlement Crown and Māori settled claims to commercial fishing rights. The Maori Fisheries Act 2004 was established.I support the invitation from my colleague and the chair Arena Williams to come to the select committee meetings. I look forward as a member of that committee to working on this bill on behalf of everyone and I'd like to encourage Te Ao Māori to make those submissions. I look forward to reading those submissions. I commend this bill to the House. Kia ora.
SpeechMARJA LUBECK (Labour): Thank you. After all that talking about cash I think Mr Penk should shout me a coffee next time we go to Coppers. As my colleague Arena Williams said before the police in New Zealand have asked for legislative changes that will give them more tools to crack down on violent offending and other criminal activities. So what the changes to this bill do is actually set down some practical and targeted measures that will help the police keep the community safe. We are interested in real solutions and not empty slogans. The police need effective but proportionate powers to disrupt criminal activity including that which is perpetuated by the gangs. This bill responds to that need and will enhance community safety. Therefore I commend it to the House.
Boyack RachelRACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to take a short call on the Criminal Activity Intervention Legislation Bill. As previous speakers have traversed in the House tonight the purpose of this bill is to ensure that police have the tools that they need to address criminal activity in our communities including activity from gangs but not just limited to gang activity.On that note I did just want to point out just following some of the member from the ACT Party's comments around the role I guess of both Parliament in setting the law but also the police in addressing and implementing that law and that there is that separation there. Our job as parliamentarians is to respond to police when they say that they need more tools in order to protect our communities and respond to crime as they see it.I wanted to particularly note—because I've read through the legislative statement which sets out why changes have been introduced around a particular piece that the ACT member mentioned which was around discharging a firearm with intent to intimidate. What the legislative statement clearly states is that there is a gap in the law and that police have identified that the law needed to be updated in order for them to be able to respond to these scenarios—in particular that this bill amends other pieces of legislation; one of which I note is around disqualifying people from holding a firearms licence. So what the police identified was that the particular law that they had in front of them in the Arms Act wasn't sufficient in order to be useful if people did discharge a firearm near a dwelling or in a public place in order to intimidate and that they needed further tools.So this is an excellent bill. I commend the Justice Committee and the Minister for their excellent work on it. I commend it to the House.
Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Kia orana Madam Speaker. Thank you. It's a privilege to take a call on the Criminal Activity Intervention Legislation Bill. I want to actually echo the sentiments of the chair of the Justice Committee Vanushi Walters in acknowledging Minister Kiritapu Allan for her focus on community safety because that's what this bill seeks to address.It is a five-part bill as members have referred to this evening. Each part is active in its own right. It creates a new offence provision or an additional enforcement tool to address criminal activity. Mr O'Connor has already referred to the discharge of a firearm for want of intimidation but there are other provisions here such as a broadening of the scope related to the 28-day seizure order for motor vehicles—such as bikes—that might be undertaking reckless or dangerous forms of activity; again forms of intimidation out in the community; or again the introduction of a new warrant—a gang conflict warrant—where tensions between gangs may lead to that warrant being executed around search and seizure.What I do note from the select committee report is a linking with that provision with that contained in the Search and Surveillance Act to ensure there is a report-back opportunity to a judge or issuing officer who effectively issues the warrant to ensure that it has been executed and the circumstances within which the execution of that has been undertaken and any objects that may have been seized as a result. So these are good tools to address organised criminal activity. I commend this bill to the House.
Williams ArenaARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): This bill is a good example of a Government getting on and solving a problem. Police identified that they needed some extra tools to crack down on gang activity specifically—in this bill—to disrupt gang conflict as it was going on. The Government responded with this proactive piece of legislation which gives police those extra tools that they need to disrupt that kind of activity but in a proportionate way.You've heard speeches around the House tonight which have acknowledged what has been a fine balancing act and I want to thank the members of the Justice Committee who have brought their practical expertise to bear. You heard from the previous speaker Nicole McKee about the way that she worked with officials to make sure that the practical implementation for firearms owners was going to be something which worked for that community and I thank her for that. You've also heard from the Hon Mark Mitchell about the way that he worked with officials based on his experience in policing. That is experience which has been invaluable to the Justice Committee and I thank him for that contribution.This piece of legislation and the one previously have been difficult technical exercises of landing the right balancing act. I think this bill does that. When the Greens speaker Teanau Tuiono said If you don't like the bill don't vote for it." well I do like this bill I will be voting for it. I commend it to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Simon O'Connor—five minutes."
SpeechDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Kia ora e te Māngai o te Whare. I am pleased to take a call on this bill as a member of the Justice Committee that has worked hard and collaboratively on what is—and I'm grateful to my colleagues Mr Mitchell and Mr Goldsmith for acknowledging—a difficult balancing act.So for those watching a quick praecipe. This is the pigeon pair the partner of the bill we got through at second reading earlier today. That one targeted the proceeds of crime and further legislation to make organised crime uneconomic for those who engage in it. This one gives the police more powers to tangle with street crime and street manifestations of organised crime.So we've got more search warrants more search powers and more ability to seize weapons where there is gang conflict escalating. We've got the increase in the ability of the police to seize weapons and vehicles and motorbikes when they are behaving badly on the roads. We have a new offence of discharging a gun with the intent to intimidate—odd that we haven't had it before; we've got it now. We've got the ability to seize cash when people are carrying unfeasibly large amounts around and to target the sorts of goods that are usually used to fence—Simeon Brown: And how much was given to the Mongrel Mob?Dr EMILY HENDERSON: —and pass these off. Not as much as your Mr Key or your Mr Muldoon gave Mr Simeon.Now what is interesting though—and what I do want to talk about—is the previous speaker the Hon Paul Goldsmith discussed this as a game of whack-a-mole. If you treat it like a game of whack-a-mole then it's always going to be a game of whack-a-mole. This is part of a suite of measures to cope with the full range to tackle organised crime from the beginning to the end and that needs more than the approach that takes a mallet to it. And with that thought I commend the bill to the House.
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Mr Speaker. Just to give a bit of a hand to my colleague Marja Lubeck I believe she said that it was the police community centre that was closed—because we are all about clear information. However I would like to take my brief call on this bill firstly to thank the Minister of Justice for her work bringing several bills before this House that do respond to community safety. She is doing an exceptional job in her role and along with other colleagues in the justice space both addressing crime as it happens but also the causes of crime and the response to ensure that there isn't or is low recidivism. There is very much a joint response across that ministerial grouping.It's a great privilege to be part of the Justice Committee and just acknowledging Mr Mitchell's comments we are a committee who work really collegially together across some really controversial and difficult issues. So to all the committee members I do consider it a real privilege to work alongside of you. With respect to this bill for me the key changes were around those search and surveillance powers. The committee spent a lot of time digging into whether we had the settings right. For those again who want to see the committee's analysis our select committee report is an excellent summary of the issues we considered and the recommendations we proposed on this bill including as Mr Mitchell has outlined the changes to require the provision of redacted information. The committee couldn't see a reason why that information wasn't provided so we sought to have that included. The other one was the recommendation around amending section 123B to require the person possessing the cash to be advised of the constable's power to seize the cash which the Minister spoke to as well.So once again this isn't a straightforward area of the law. This bill and the bill that has just gone through second reading the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Amendment Bill do present complex issues. Mr Goldsmith in his contribution on the previous bill suggested that when we're considering matters like this we may want to consider things like review and monitoring. I do believe that there is some merit to that given the complexity of the rights issues that are before us. But I do think that this is a sound approach to the criminal justice space and the issues we are facing and I commend this bill to the House.
Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Kia orana Mr Speaker. Thank you. It's a pleasure to rise and take the final call this evening on the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Amendment Bill. It seems to me that this is a bill that will improve the effectiveness of the law in either restraining or forfeiting—or perhaps both—property that is acquired by way of significant criminal activity.I also want to acknowledge the work of the Justice Committee. Many members have referred to the technical changes that have been recommended by that select committee one of which actually—and I take Mr Penk's point perhaps not to delve too much into the detail—is of note: the official assignee could continue to hold seized assets beyond a 28-day period in circumstances where a court might be considering an application relating to whether or not it should grant a restraining order. That on face value makes sense in terms of time. If that's one particular technical change that a select committee does it does point to a body of work that the committee has done that makes it a much more relevant piece of legislation which of course is what we ask of our select committees.With choices around significant criminal activity come consequences. That is clearly a good thing. I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechMARJA LUBECK (Labour): Thank you thank you. I rise in support of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Amendment bill in its second reading. First of all I would also like to acknowledge everybody who made a submission on this bill as well as my colleagues on the Justice Committee for all their mahi. I have only recently joined the select committee so I wasn't part of the work done on this particular bill but I am looking forward to being part of this hard-working team chaired by the awesome Vanushi Walters. I've learnt a lot actually about this bill from previous speakers. Nicole McKee obviously explained quite a lot of the complexities around this bill. The committee did a good job in working its way around all of those challenges and bringing it back to the House after careful consideration.Together with the Criminal Activity Intervention Legislation Bill which will come up tonight as well the measures in this bill will also hit gangs where it hurts most: their profits. In 2020 we campaigned on working harder and smarter to keep our communities safe break the cycle of offending and tackle the root causes of crime and that across a range of areas is exactly what we're doing. So that will mean that not only will we have more front-line police than ever before but they will also have greater powers to hit the gangs where it hurts.Now I had a constituent come into my office the other day and they said very eloquently National speaks loudly about being tough on crime while actually being quite useless." National talk quite a big game—we've heard it tonight from Mr Mitchell—when they're in Opposition but in Government they failed to deliver. They couldn't deliver firearms prohibition orders in nine years despite multiple attempts but we have. And during the Nats' last time in office they ran down the police with their funding cuts and insufficient staffing and they closed down community stations. They like to forget about that but in 2015 roughly 30 police community stations were closed—including the one in Ōrewa; Mr Mitchell I believe you were around at that time and you didn't manage to keep it open. But this Government is committed to provide the police the tools they need to tackle organised crime and therefore I commend the bill to the House."
SpeechSORAYA PEKE-MASON (Labour): Tēnā koe e te Mana Whakawā. It pleases me to take a short call on the second reading of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Amendment Bill.It is critical that we keep our communities safe and break the cycle of offending including addressing the root cause of crime. I want to reiterate what the bill does. Fundamentally—and I'm emphasising fundamentally"—it is to improve the law's effectiveness at restraining and forfeiting property derived from significant criminal activity. At a local level we can see what this does—like for example property belonging to criminals when one sees the name of a gang entity plastered on the fence or on a building. Simply put it allows targeting of associates of original criminal groups and restraining property; it means criminals living overseas will lose those assets through court orders; it means amending technical gaps; it means eliminating a potential for criminals to hide funds in KiwiSaver. These amendments are significant and a much-needed change to the status quo. I thank those who support the bill. I want to thank also the select committee for getting this across the line to the second reading and everyone who has made a submission to the bill. Kia ora."
Williams ArenaARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. I could not have given the House a better summation of the consideration that the Justice Committee gave to this bill and the operation of this bill than the member Nicole McKee just did. I think that reflects around the committee table just how invested every single member of that committee was in the goal to make sure that people cannot and should not profit from crime and that when they do there are serious consequences. This is a Government that is invested in that goal that is giving itself new tools to crack down on organised crime and to be able to target what is going on in gangs.I just wanted to touch on how the committee process has arrived at so many technical changes. This was the most technical consideration of a bill that I have ever had to do in my parliamentary career and along with the Criminal Activity Intervention Legislation Bill—which this House will consider next—it required the most delicate balancing of rights with this goal that everyone in the committee room shared to make sure that this crime was going to be punished and was restricting people from engaging in this kind of profiteering off the backs of misery in people's lives that organised crime causes. We were all united in that goal.My reflection on the committee process was that we needed every member in that room to engage in the discussion. I thank the Green member for her very thoughtful contribution tonight. Jan Logie I listened to your speech really carefully and I think you have highlighted what was just so difficult about the values proposition in this bill and it's something that the committee's really spent time to engage on and discuss around the room. Select committees work best when we are able to do that. These were issues that we could all grapple with and we all have values that we come to the committee room about. I thank those members who no matter what colour engaged in those values.I was disappointed and I was heckling Mr Mitchell during his speech because in committee he did not introduce the concerns that he spoke to the House tonight. It's in committee that we need to have those debates. The police did not submit to the Justice Committee. They did not make the arguments that Mr Mitchell said the police made. He recited from the Police Association submission to the Justice Committee which I know well and which I considered myself. And so that is why on this side of the House we are comfortable with the values position. In the select committee report we said that we recommend all amendments unanimously and I can say to the House that we did agree that unanimously.
SpeechDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Kia ora Madam Speaker. Let's now return a little bit of logic over the somewhat unfocused emotion we've heard this evening. For those watching in the House—and there are some people who do watch the House—this is one of two bills that we're bringing forward tonight which gives the police and the authorities more power to sort organised crime. So the one we're going to do next is around things like boy racers and bad behaviour by gangs on the road.But the first one that we're talking about now which is the pigeon pair with that is about taking the money from the gangs controlling gang activity by taking away their profits. What it does is three things: it gives new powers to target associates of organised criminal gangs so that when they try to keep their profits safe by giving them to a friend or a family member we can go after that money and if that associate cannot show where it came from we get it; we have a part of the bill also that allows us to chase those people when they try to run overseas; and we also have—and I think this is quite useful—one which stops them hiding it in their KiwiSaver account. Now very briefly the member opposite—Mark Mitchell—has been arguing that we should reduce the threshold for chasing assets below $30000. What I'd point out to the House is that that $30000 threshold is in line with the original legislation which put it in which—guess what!—was passed by the National Government. Hon Andrew Little: Who put it in?Dr EMILY HENDERSON: Thank you Madam Speaker. Oh it would be the National Government Mr Little. It would be the National Government. My goodness. But apparently that wasn't worth the paper it was written on Mr Mitchell.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! Jan Logie.
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Madam Speaker for the opportunity to make some brief remarks in relation to this bill. I must say I was a little disappointed at some of the rhetoric and catchphrases on that side of the House. However I do appreciate that the Opposition are supporting this bill and Mr Goldsmith is correct that the committee worked really well on this bill. It isn't always easy to strike the right balance in terms of any incursion into rights but also providing police with the tools that they need to keep communities safe. And this bill is certainly in that space as is the next bill that will be before the House that's responding to a changed space in the criminal justice world. The select committee report is a really robust one—so for those interested in the committee's work I would recommend reading it. But just pointing to two changes that the committee made and Mr Goldsmith did speak briefly to one: the fact that the value of the specific property would apply cumulatively. So while restraint and forfeiture is permitted for specific property clauses 15 and 21 weren't clear whether that was cumulative or not. So that wasn't so much a change we made as opposed to ensuring that that was clear in the bill.The second one which I thought was of significance was amending clause 15 to allow the Commissioner of Police to provide estimates rather than a formal valuation and that isn't the end of the process of course because once a property is restrained it is possible to undertake a formal valuation at that stage. So again it just demonstrates the balancing act that the committee was looking to achieve in terms of ensuring fairness but also community safety and again providing police with the tools they need. So it's a pleasure to commend this bill to the House.
Maiden Statement — Tama Potaka
Davis Kelvin; Rurawhe AdrianHon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti): I move That this debate be now adjourned.Motion agreed to.SPEAKER: This debate is adjourned and is set down for resumption next sitting day. Members I will indicate now that at the conclusion of Tama Potaka's maiden statement the House will suspend for the dinner break and resume for Government orders of the day at 7 p.m. I call on Tama Potaka to make his maiden statement.
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 5 to Minister 22 February
Hipkins Chris; Rurawhe AdrianAMENDED ANSWERS TO ORAL QUESTIONSQuestion No. 5 to Minister 22 FebruaryRt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Prime Minister): Point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to correct an answer to a supplementary question that I gave on Wednesday 22 February in answer to question No. 5.SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In one of my answers to a supplementary question from David Seymour in response to the question concerned I said that Government tax revenue as a proportion of GDP had declined under this Government. It hasn't.
Rotorua District Council (Representation Arrangements) Bill — Discharge
Obituaries — Paul East CNZM KC; Chester Borrows QSO; and Georgina Beyer MNZM
Rurawhe AdrianPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: Petitions have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.CLERK: Petition of Seann Paurini requesting that the House create an Ombudsman empowered to oversee any iwi or corporation activitypetition of Kate Day requesting that the House make public transport permanently half price for everyonepetition of Debbie Port requesting that the House urge the Government to regulate standard user tariffs.SPEAKER: Those petitions stand referred to the Petitions Committee. Ministers have delivered papers.CLERK: Annual reports for the Health Quality and Safety Commission New Zealand and Whakaata Māori Māori Television ServiceGovernment response to the report of the Education and Workforce Committee Briefing on the report of undocumented Tuvaluans in AucklandFramework Agreement on the establishment of the International Solar Alliance together with National Interest Analysis.SPEAKER: Those papers are published under the authority of the House. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Reports of the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee on the 2021-22 annual reviews of New Zealand Growth Capital Partners Ltd the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment and the New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Ltdreports of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement 2023 and the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update 2022 and the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2022-23 Platform Economy and Remedial Matters) Bill (No 2)report of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee on the 2021-22 annual reviews of the Ministry of Defence and the New Zealand Defence Forcereport of the Justice Committee on the Human Rights (Incitement on Ground of Religious Belief) Amendment Billreports of the Petitions Committee on the petition of the Breast Cancer Foundation New Zealand petition of Catherine Bindon petition of Natalie Horspool petition of Sarah Rowland and the petition of Victor Wellingtonreport of the Regulations Review Committee on the COVID19 Public Health Response (Self-isolation Requirements) Amendment Order (No 2) 2022.SPEAKER: The bills are set down for second reading the Budget Policy Statement is set down for consideration and the report of the Regulations Review Committee is set down for consideration. The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of a bill.CLERK: St Peter's Parish Endowment Fund Trust Bill introduction.SPEAKER: That bill is set down for first reading.
Rurawhe AdrianROTORUA DISTRICT COUNCIL (REPRESENTATION ARRANGEMENTS) BILLDischargeSPEAKER: I wish to inform the House that I have received notification from the Rotorua District Council the promoter of the bill withdrawing the Rotorua District Council (Representation Arrangements) Bill under Standing Order 279. The bill is therefore discharged from further consideration by the House.