edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Mallard Trevor: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10875. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Oh I think the member’s time has expired.Kris Faafoi: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My understanding of the situation is that it is the split call that sometimes the Greens and Labour can take and that Mr Henare took the first 5 minutes and was therefore entitled to the next 5 minutes as well.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Had the member started the next 5 minutes?Kris Faafoi: That is my understanding.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The notes that I have been—I am slightly embarrassed because I think I was in the Chair at the time. But the notes—Kris Faafoi: Well my understanding of the situation is that if he had not started the next 5 minutes he would still have about 15 seconds to go and could then start the next 5 minutes.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I think what he will find is that the Green Party might want to use the other 5 minutes.Gareth Hughes: My understanding is that Kevin Hague took slot 9A so the second traditional Labour slot should still be available.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Kevin Hague took the first of the Green slots which was the sixth call on the bill. Normally the Greens take and are allocated the first of the 5-minute slots. No one took it so Mr Henare took it and I think he would be entitled to go on if he had started the second half. But actually with the way the rules are it is a 5-minute call. My time sheet says the member started at 9.55—unless it was 9.55 and a half which I did not record. Then I think we are going to go on to a Green call unless someone can convince me otherwise.
Dowie Sarah: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10874. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): I am quite taken aback. I did not realise that I had such a connection with Mr Parker—that we had this sort of telepathic thing going on. I am quite taken aback but it must be since I have come on to the Local Government and Environment Committee that we sort of have this unspoken bond. I am looking forward to exploring this more as we move through our careers this term on that select committee. So thank you very much for that tribute.Just in response I will say that there has been research done by Environment Southland in Southland—and I am not suggesting that there are not pockets or water bodies that are not polluted—and we actually have an opportunity in Southland. What we have found is that it takes approximately 3 years for nitrates and things to come through the system. So although that poses some risk it is also an opportunity. It is an opportunity for us to clean up those waterways that are not so good. Environment Southland is working through that issue and developing a plan catchment by catchment so that we can do that. That is an opportunity and I am really proud of that and I am looking forward to Environment Southland moving that forward.But I digress. I am going to speak about the Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill.The sustainable management of our natural resources is a premise of utmost importance to New Zealanders and of course Cantabrians are no different. This bill establishes a mixed-model governance structure for Environment Canterbury during the 2016-19 local government term. What that means is that there will be a council formed of seven elected councillors—that is seven elected councillors—and six appointed councillors. The reason for that is to keep up the momentum that the commissioners have achieved in respect of water planning issues and to ensure the orderly transition of the institutional knowledge that the commissioners have the stakeholder gains that they have made and the relationships that they have built moving forward.This is a good transitional bill. It is a good transitional phase. Of course all Cantabrians want to move forward to a fully elected board model but this is a transitional process to maintain that institutional knowledge and that progression. Therefore I support this bill.
Korako Nuk: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKorako Nuk: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10871. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]NUK KORAKO (National): Mauri ora e Te Mana Whakawā. One of the biggest political issues of the year is water and quite rightly so. Water is one of the most valuable resources that we have and one that requires well-considered public policy and careful management. This is why improving our management of fresh water is a top priority of this Government. But a lot of the responsibility for management of our water resources falls to local government and in particular regional councils.Seventy percent of New Zealand’s fresh water—the resource itself—is actually in Canterbury and it falls under the responsibility of Environment Canterbury. You would think given that statistic that it would have been priority No. 1 for the Environment Canterbury councillors to get water management right but apparently not. Ngāi Tahu are mana whenua and have a significant interest in the management of water resources in the Canterbury region. You might think that Environment Canterbury would have seen its relationship with Ngāi Tahu as a key one but no it did not—no it did not. I was on Ngāi Tahu’s governance board at the time and I well remember the dysfunction that infected the relationship and the extent to which the iwi had to ensure that appropriate consultation occurred often bearing the cost of that. The Creech report in 2010 found that Environment Canterbury had no established systems and processes for iwi input or even for consultation. That was the background to the Creech report’s recommendation that the Environment Canterbury councillors be replaced with commissioners and that is exactly what happened.That was a decision that no Government would want to be put in a position to make and one that I know was not taken lightly. But it was the right decision and the result has been that environmental management in our region is back on track. Environment Canterbury is complying with the law—is complying with the law—in the issuing of consents. Also it has a comprehensive plan to manage our water which has been put in place. So in fact Environment Canterbury is not merely compliant with the law now; it has gone from being one of the country’s slowest and worst-performing councils to being one of the best. Strong relationships have been established with Ngāi Tahu and the territorial authorities in this region.Now is the time to begin the transition—I agree with that—and now is the time to begin the transition back to fully elected council. All of those things that were just said—we hear all of this from the other side of the House but at the end of the day this bill is a fantastic bill. It is actually going in the right direction and I commend it to the House. Kia ora.
Hayes Joanne: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10868. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): I rise to support the Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill. I think it is a very good bill. I do not agree with the previous speaker Denis O’Rourke. I think that if you look back a little bit into the history of how the Government got involved the district councils of the Canterbury region approached the Government—and it was Labour at the time—to do something in 2008 because there were some issues of under-performance by the councillors at the time. They felt that their regional council was not moving anywhere it was basically going down and so at that time according to my reading the then Labour Government decided to leave it until after the elections. So when National came in National picked it up and moved with it fulfilling the wishes of the people who actually put that issue forward to the previous Government. The National Government went ahead and did it—it is a Government of action. So we went through and appointed these I believe very highly experienced commissioners.I think it is not very nice to hear the previous speaker basically denigrate the great work that these people have done when he says they can leave and go and he basically says you know: “You’ve done a great job but that’s it.” But I believe that their skills should not be lost and so the transitional part of this bill where we have some appointed members staying on there for the continuity—in other words we are not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.Actually I think what we are doing is giving an opportunity for that bathwater to be sweetened by the appointment of the two Ngāi Tahu appointees. I believe that they will bring some great skills to that group even if it is for the 3-year period but I believe that you know they have just as many skills as anyone else who would be standing in the election process. Therefore I think that the Canterbury people are very fortunate to be able to have such a very strong iwi put forward some—most probably I would dare say—highly skilled people as appointees to Environment Canterbury. When I look around the country and I see the skill base and the work that Ngāi Tahu has done economically for the region of Canterbury I think that Canterbury is very fortunate to have these two people who will be coming forward.So my contribution is short. I think it is a good bill. I think that everybody else—the Opposition has been not very nice to the people who have worked hard to bring Environment Canterbury back to being a top-performing regional council which it was not at the end of 2008. So I have no hesitation and I am very proud to support the bill to the House. Thank you.
Reti Shane: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeReti Shane: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10855. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): It is a pleasure to take a short call—the last call—on this bill. I think it is important and appropriate that the commissioner and her team stay in place beyond this year’s local body elections—12 months after their appointment—which is what the New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill provides for. I say that for several reasons: first of all it takes time for a new board including a commissioner to grapple with the complexities of health let alone a district health board that is challenged. Over the three boards that I was lucky enough to be involved with I made the observation that it takes about 18 months for a new board member to grapple with really complex terms like “case weights” “DRGs” and “inter-district flow”—they are really complex. At about 18 months in they grasped it and the board members were really able to make good progress.I think the second point is that the commissioners have set a target—a deficit target—of $35.9 million compared with what was projected at $42 million and they should be given time to meet their target under their own strategic direction. The third reason why I think this bill is a good bill is that it is very challenging for staff when there is a short turn-round of board members at a district health board. We had that in 2000-01 when the transitional district health boards were appointed—they were appointed for 1 year. What happened was that the whole organisation sort of went into watch-and-wait mode instead of act-and-move. So I think it is appropriate to have continuity there.I also think there is a precedent. In my own region the Kaipara District Council was challenged in 2012 and we placed a group of commissioners there and the local body elections were in 2013—again like this 1 year later. In fact we rolled them over. We have just reappointed them through to the current local body elections and it has been effective. So there is a real precedent for this sort of thing.I think finally there has been a lot of comment around public involvement or lack of involvement in the current positioning of the board and I understand that the commissioner is re-establishing the advisory committees—the hospital advisory committee the aged and disability support advisory committee and combining that with the community and public health and advisory committee. I also understand that the commissioner and an iwi representative will be part of those committees. So I think there is ongoing public engagement in the new board and the new board structure and I commend and encourage the board for the work it is doing and that it will do. I think this bill is correct and I commend it to the House.
Borrows Chester: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10851. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Metiria Turei—a 5-minute call.
Dean Jacqui: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10845. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): It is not about the food—it is not about the food. There are far more important issues around the Southern District Health Board than a beat-up around hospital food which is being used by the Opposition to try to score points—as simple as that. I am not going to waste my precious time raving about something that is materially not important to the performance of the district health board. It is ironic however that the commissioners are appointed by the Minister of Health to bring the Southern District Health Board into shape for its patients and all the Opposition can do is talk about the food. I would suggest that it has got its priorities in completely the wrong place.I would also challenge the figures proposed by the member opposite Clare Curran as a fabrication because the experience of people going to Dunedin Hospital and Southland Hospital in Invercargill is materially different from that which is described by the politically motivated opposite who are whipping people up into a frenzy. The reality is that people do not go to hospital to eat the food. People go to hospital to get treatment. Here is the good news. Here is the progress that is being made by the Southern District Health Board—I am going to go through some of these good figures. The Southern District Health Board has made great progress on the new faster cancer treatment target and that is that it has achieved 77 percent up 10 percent in the last quarter. That is progress; that is what matters. Does food matter or does faster cancer treatment matter? I know which one I would vote for: for better clinical services each and every time and that is what the commissioners are focused on. That is what the commissioners should be focused on.The elective surgery targets were exceeded by 7 percent in the last quarter. That is the kind of target that I focus on: outcomes for patients not politically motivated protests out in the rain of Dunedin about something that is basically immaterial—and I dispute the facts as presented by the other side. The target for shorter stays in emergency departments was exceeded by 5 percent on the previous quarter and also further work and improvements are being made in immunisation coverage. I would say that those are the targets that matter; those are the issues that matter.The New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill extends the time in office of the commissioners of the district health board. They have a large amount of work to do. This bill will enable them to get on and do it for the benefit not just of Dunedin Hospital—or indeed Invercargill hospital—but also of the rural hospitals and the rural healthcare that I care about so much in the Waitaki electorate. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker.
Borrows Chester: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10845. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member’s time has expired.
Carter David: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10838. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I call on Government order of the day No. 1. [Interruption] Order! To Kris Faafoi when the Clerk is on his feet announcing Government order of the day No. 1 the barrage must cease. I apologise to the Clerk.
Young Jonathan: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10837. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage: What announcements has she made on funding for regional cultural facilities?Hon MAGGIE BARRY (Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage): I have just this afternoon announced the launch of a more flexible replacement for the regional museums policy which we are calling the Regional Culture and Heritage Fund. It will be funded at the same level as the old regional museums policy an average of about $6.6 million a year but it widens the eligibility criteria to include potential support for local performing arts venues heritage buildings and whare taonga. We have also removed the requirement for collections to be of national significance to allow smaller museums and art galleries to potentially access that fund. As a supplement to support from local government philanthropist and community funding this fund will be able to support more regional institutions which may struggle to get the capital needed for major projects.Jonathan Young: How do cultural facilities help with the regional development?Hon MAGGIE BARRY: Some of the finest recent additions to our regional culture scene such as the Len Lye Centre in the member’s own fine electorate of New Plymouth and the Toitū Otago Settlers Museum in Dunedin have significantly befitted from the regional museums policy funding. They bring in tourism jobs and growth. They enable all New Zealanders to have access to the best of national and international culture. They encourage innovation creativity and personal development and they inspire our children. The new Regional Culture and Heritage Fund will help to showcase talent heritage and culture across the country.
Mark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10836. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development): on behalf of thePrime Minister: Yes.Ron Mark: When will he tell his Minister of Revenue to “get some guts” and tackle those multinationals shirking their fair share of tax like Facebook Methanex Lockheed Martin and Google as opposed to hiding behind OECD directives?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I am not sure which statement the member was referring to but in regards to multinational tax we have put a lot more people and resources into the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) in recent years. The Government’s view is that we should be working with the OECD multilaterally and we are asking our officials to look and see whether there is anything that the latest changes in Australia and the UK are doing that we might be able to apply here. It is important that all companies pay their fair share of tax but you have to ultimately do it multilaterally because these are multilateral issues.Ron Mark: Why do ordinary Kiwis have to pay tax when 20 multinationals in New Zealand who earned $10 billion in 1 year paid only $1.8 million in tax?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: It is actually a bit misleading anyway to refer to turnover and the level of tax in relation to turnover because in this country we tax profit not turnover. In terms of just quoting turnover figures for certain companies no matter what their origin is and then saying that this is what they should or should not be paying in tax—it should actually be on profit. I refer the member back to my earlier answer in relation to the work that is being done both within our IRD and also with the OECD multilaterally because I share the view of the member that everybody should be paying their fair share of tax and we are working hard to ensure that that is the case.Ron Mark: If the conservative Governments in the United Kingdom and Australia you know new besties—Mr SPEAKER: Just ask the question please. I just want the question. Start the question again.Ron Mark: If the conservative Governments in the United Kingdom and Australia can adopt Google taxes in their own national interests then why can we not do the same here now?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I note that in the case of Australia we are literally talking about an announcement that was made in the last couple of days and has certainly not been passed through its Parliament in any way shape or form yet. But as I said in answer to the earlier supplementary question we have asked our officials to have a look and see whether what Australia is proposing would work in New Zealand and we are certainly open-minded about that. It is an important issue. But we think the most likely positive outcome for the New Zealand Treasury is in terms of the work that is being done at the OECD and we are a very active participant in that.
Lee Melissa: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLee Melissa: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10835. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.MELISSA LEE (National) to the Minister of Immigration: What recent announcements has he made to help attract entrepreneurs to New Zealand?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Immigration): Last week I announced a new Global Impact Visa designed to bring innovative global entrepreneurs to New Zealand. This visa will cater for high-impact entrepreneurs investors and start-up teams to launch global ventures from New Zealand and will attract younger highly talented successful and well-connected entrepreneurs who are at the start of their entrepreneurial career and able to establish their ventures here in New Zealand.Melissa Lee: In what ways will the introduction of global impact visas contribute to the Government’s Business Growth Agenda? [Interruption]Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Father Jack over there. Global impact visas will help meet the Government’s Business Growth Agenda of innovation and investment objectives by lifting innovation in New Zealand and will help expand the pool of smart capital by attracting individual investors and entrepreneurs to live here. The successful implementation it gives will create new jobs through the establishment of new ventures and access to global networks.
Twyford Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTwyford Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10830. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū) to the Minister responsible for HNZC: Does he have confidence in Housing New Zealand’s handling of procurement and conflict of interest issues in light of the Auditor-General’s report into the contracting of Andrew Body Ltd to advise on the sale of state housing?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Housing): on behalf of theMinister responsible for HNZC: The Minister is satisfied that Housing New Zealand has accepted the recommendations of the Auditor-General’s report. It has already taken action to improve the procurement practices so yes the Minister has confidence in the current practice.Phil Twyford: Is it acceptable for Housing New Zealand to fail to follow its own rules and not tender $2.3 million worth of contracts to merchant banker Andrew Body to advise on the State house sell-off and is the Minister satisfied that Housing New Zealand’s assurances to the Auditor-General will be sufficient to ensure that these practices are not continued?Hon PAULA BENNETT: The Minister has certainly had guarantees from Housing New Zealand that those practices are not occurring. Six out of the ten were over $100000. Certainly its own guidelines said that it should have gone out. It felt it had reasons why it did not. It has accepted the findings of the Auditor-General and it has made changes since and we accept that.Phil Twyford: Is he concerned that the investment fund of one of Andrew Body’s clients the UK company John Laing Group is now part of a consortia shortlisted to buy more than 1200 State houses in Tauranga after the Auditor-General found that Housing New Zealand failed to properly manage Andrew Body’s conflicts of interest in respect of his relationship with John Laing?Hon PAULA BENNETT: Certainly what the Minister has been informed by Housing New Zealand is that it was very aware of Andrew Body’s conflicts of interest and they were raised. What it did not do well was record them so he thinks they certainly did know of them. To the first part of the question yes the Minister is confident they are going to manage it well.Phil Twyford: Is this why the Government changed the law to give him extraordinary unfettered powers to sell State houses to anyone he likes on whatever terms he likes so that he can flog off billions of dollars of State housing to speculators while New Zealanders in need miss out?Hon PAULA BENNETT: No.Phil Twyford: How can the public have confidence in his stewardship of State housing when he is selling off billions of dollars of State housing to merchant bankers and foreign companies when New Zealanders are living in garages and camping grounds and his Government cannot even follow basic rules about conflict of interest?Hon PAULA BENNETT: Because as per usual the member is making it up and his question has no validity.
Finlayson Christopher: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFinlayson Christopher: Business Statement[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10825. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) on behalf of theLeader of the House:When the House resumes on Tuesday 10 May the Government will look to make progress on the Taxation (Residential Land Withholding Tax GST on Online Services and Student Loans) Bill the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill and a number of other bills on the Order Paper.
Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSittings of the House[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10878. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Sittings of the HouseKRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): Just looking at the time and the state of play that we are in I seek leave to adjourn the House early.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Is there any objection to that occurring? No brave person.
Voting — Correction—Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) BillText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVoting — Correction—Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10876. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]VotingCorrection—Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) BillJOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National): This is to correct a vote for the Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill. I have just had a call from United Future. It was opposed.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Leave is required of the House for that change to be made. Therefore I will put to the House the question of leave and that is that United Future be shown as voting against the vote we just had on the Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill. Is there any objection to that? There appears to be none.
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10825. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 5 May 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Business StatementHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) on behalf of theLeader of the House:When the House resumes on Tuesday 10 May the Government will look to make progress on the Taxation (Residential Land Withholding Tax GST on Online Services and Student Loans) Bill the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill and a number of other bills on the Order Paper.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10950. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 7 be agreed to.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Clause 7 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment presently.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10950. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10950. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon Annette King to clause 7 be agreed to:in the heading to clause 7 replace “Cancellation” with “Postponement”.7 Postponement of 2016 election of Southern DHBThe triennial general election for the Southern DHB in 2016 is postponed until a date set by Order in Council.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10950. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 6 be agreed to.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Clause 6 agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Ria Bond to clause 7 be agreed to:in the heading to clause 7 replace “cancellation” with “Postponement”.replace clause 7(1) with:The following provisions of the 2000 Act shall apply to the Southern DHB in relation to the triennial general election of 2016 explicitly:(a) Clause 16(1) of Schedule 2 (which provides for the Minister to appoint persons to hold positions on the board of that DHB that would otherwise be held by elected members); and(b) Clause 16(3) of Schedule 2 of the 2000 Act does not apply to the Southern DHB triennial general election of 2016.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10949. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 5 be agreed to.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Clause 5 agreed to.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10949. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 4 be agreed to.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Clause 4 agreed to.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10949. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10949. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 3 be agreed to.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Clause 3 agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Ria Bond to clause 4 be agreed to:replace clause 4 with:4 PurposeThe purpose of this Act is to integrate a commissioner within the bounds of the 2016 triennial general election of the Southern DHB in order to provide until the repeal date for the continuation of guidance of a commissioner for the Southern DHB.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10949. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 2 be agreed to.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Clause 2 agreed to.
Vote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10948. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Clause 1 agreed to.
Vote: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10931. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 120New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 1ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a third time.
Vote: Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10918. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill be reported to the House by 15 September 2016.Ayes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Motion agreed to.
Vote: Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10917. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 107New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Social Services Committee.
Vote: Taxation (Residential Land Withholding Tax GST on Online Services and Student Loans) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Taxation (Residential Land Withholding Tax GST on Online Services and Student Loans) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10896. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Taxation (Residential Land Withholding Tax GST on Online Services and Student Loans) Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Bill read a third time.
Tisch Lindsay: Taxation (Transformation: First Phase Simplification and Other Measures) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Taxation (Transformation: First Phase Simplification and Other Measures) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10961. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. The time has come for me to report progress.Progress to be reported presently.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill without amendment and progress on the Taxation (Transformation: First Phase Simplification and Other Measures) Bill.Report adopted.
Nash Stuart: Taxation (Transformation: First Phase Simplification and Other Measures) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNash Stuart: Taxation (Transformation: First Phase Simplification and Other Measures) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10960. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STUART NASH (Labour—Napier): I have got a contribution to make around clause 59. It is quite interesting that there are three members of the National Government who are members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee and that they are quite happy to yell across the floor. I would love it if the chair of the committee at least would stand up and give a contribution. I am sure he has a lot to offer. He certainly does when he is sitting down. I think he should make that official.We have talked about the fact that we are simplifying mainly away from writing. Let me just give you an idea of—I will not say how “far-reaching” this is but how many amendments we have had to go through. So for words like “apply” there are 39 changes to different Acts; “ask” there are 11 changes; “inform” two changes; “notice” 28 changes; “notify” 14 changes; and “request” nine changes. This is in the schedule and this is where we insert these defined terms at the bottom of each clause so that if a taxpayer has any concern or any doubt about what for example “apply” might mean or “ask” might mean they can go to the interpretation section in the Act and they will find out exactly what it does mean.One thing I would like to talk about is a change to clause 59 and I think this is actually a very good thing. This is the Income Tax Act and what clause 59 basically says is “Section RM 5 amended (Overpayment on income statements)”. This is overpayment on income statements. If we look at section RM 5 of the Income Tax Act it says: “This section applies when an income statement has been provided to a person and the result is that an amount of tax must be refunded to the person. For the purposes of this section the amount of tax must be more than $200.”What clause 59 proposes is to move this threshold from $200 to $600. So how it works at the moment is that when a salary and wage earner—not a business taxpayer but a salary and wage earner—needs an end-of-year assessment they can apply for or get issued what is called a personal tax summary. The result is that if the refund at that moment is less than $200 and they do not confirm their personal tax summary—so they do not put it in but it is less than $200—then what will happen is that the IRD—
Borrows Chester: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10931. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
Ross Jami-Lee: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10931. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for the New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill—all questions to be debated as one question.
Cosgrove Clayton: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCosgrove Clayton: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour): Like others I will not labour the point. Suffice it to say this has been a good exercise in terms of cross-party cooperation which in itself respects those people who died and those people who were injured and who live with those injuries both psychological and physical every day. This is a bill that I think will meet the mark. It is supported by the House. I share the compliment to the chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee Scott Simpson as being part of the process. I commend the bill to the House.
Hayes Joanne: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): I stand to take a brief call on this bill the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill in its third reading. Yes as I have said in previous contributions that I have made in this House New Zealand sits on the Ring of Fire and we are prone to earthquakes. I think that the earthquake in 2011 really did shake us besides literally in the way that we think about the way our buildings are constructed and about our heritage buildings and how we look after those into the future. I think that the work within the Local Government and Environment Committee that has gone on in preparing this bill to this point has been for me a very rewarding process. I think that a lot of that has been the ability for all parties across the House to be able to input into this bill and for the people who put the submissions forward for their voices to be heard.I also want to pay tribute to those who lost their lives in Christchurch—the 185 of them. It is a sad time for those families and that will happen and continue to happen every year forthwith. I want to thank our chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee Scott Simpson because with his wise counsel and leadership he got us through. I am very pleased to support this bill and I commend it to the House. Thank you.
Tisch Lindsay: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Poto Williams—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10928. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Mojo Mathers—5 minutes.