edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Hudson Brett; Tisch LindsayBRETT HUDSON (National): It is a pleasure to rise in support of the Land Transfer Bill in its third reading. I sat on the Government Administration Committee and it was an absolute pleasure to serve on that and to hear the submissions. I would like to congratulate and commend the Hon Mark Mitchell. He was a member of the committee at the time the bill went through the select committee phase and of course he is now the Minister who gets to shepherd it and conclude this item of business in the House with hopefully from what we hear today unanimous support.The purposes of the bill fundamentally were to modernise land transfer to meet quite frankly the 20th century let alone the 21st. It does things such as permit certain notices to be addressed electronically instead of in paper form. Some of us would say that with email being around for as long as it has that is many many years overdue. But overall the idea to modernise what is otherwise a particularly strong and well-regarded title system is a good thing.The bill also introduced an area that the previous speaker Denis O'Rourke touched on quite wrongly I think actually. I think that if that member had spent some time on the select committee he might better understand the provisions and what they introduced in the first place and why. The bill actually introduced the ability in the case of a manifest injustice to permit some sort of redress or some sort of compensation for someone who had fraudulently been done over if you will over their land. So if you look at what would otherwise have been the case of course the ability to get the right level of compensation or redress simply was not there before this bill.So the bill says the court can make a decision to provide compensation if the injustice is clear and manifest. The compensation could be monetary; it could be in kind in some form; or in the case of the provision that the previous member dwelt upon it could be by returning the title to the original holder. Of course that would itself though have implications for the notion of indefeasibility of title. If the member had sat on the select committee he might realise that that is why it is placed as the final alternative to other forms of compensation because while this bill modernises the land transfer processes and system it understands and fundamentally does not alter the linchpin of the confidence in land title in New Zealand which is indefeasibility of title and any changes to it even though they may be just to the parties who were wronged still have to bear in mind and accommodate the principle of indefeasibility of title. It is a shame Mr O'Rourke did not sit on the select committee even if he had done so simply in an observational status.This is a very very good bill. All provisions of it were well scrutinised and are well worth the affirmation of this House. I commend this bill to the House.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Members the next call is a split call. Michael Wood—5 minutes.
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): It is a pleasure to rise in support of the Land Transfer Bill in its third reading. I would just like to respond to the previous speaker Ruth Dyson and say that of course on this side of the House we know who the Hon Maurice Williamson is. Who would forget the man who was able to fill out the costume of The Greatest American Hero—and did he not look good in that I must say.This bill is about updating and amending the Land Transfer Act 1952. I think it demonstrates a focused Government in its third term that is relentlessly modernising systems in New Zealand. We have one of the best electronic land transfer systems in the world and it is something that we should be proud of—in fact something we should boast about. We are leading the way and in fact that is what this bill is about. It is modernising. It is the old cliché—we are moving from the paper office to the paperless office.I think what underpins this bill is giving New Zealanders confidence. We know that when we look at land and housing it underpins a lot of social and economic well-being. We saw that in Canterbury post the earthquakes and the impact that had on people in terms of the devastation of their land and houses. So we want to give people confidence. We want to give them security in their property rights. We know that for a lot of people buying a house will be one of the biggest investments they make over their life's course.It is right that we are updating the Land Transfer Act 1952 and bringing it into the 21st century. I do not want to get caught plagiarising so I will quote the second speaker from Labour Raymond Huo who said: An effective system for land transfer is essential for … a modern economy." I think I will bridge to Raymond Huo a fellow centre-right thinker. He is quite right that property rights and land transfer does underpin a modern working economy. We should be supporting that and in fact we are supporting that under this bill.There was quite a bit of detail that the Government Administration Committee kicked about during the select committee stage. I was not on the committee at that stage but I just want to acknowledge the chair the Hon Ruth Dyson and also the deputy chair Paul Foster-Bell for their leadership.There is a lot of technicality within this bill. I learnt a lot about the Torrens system the law of indefeasibility and manifest injustice but ultimately the select committee was able to clarify the role of the court in understanding where there has been injustice and when there has ultimately been compensation and also clarify from when the courts can get involved for actually altering a land transfer title as well.I just want to finish by saying this is a very good bill and I acknowledge the responsible Minister the Hon Mark Mitchell for all his work and previous Ministers before him. On this side of the House we know things are a team effort so we do work as a team. That is why I commend this bill to the House. Thank you."
Young Jonathan; Tisch LindsayJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): I want to take just a brief call to support this bill and I just want to thank the member opposite Mahesh Bindra for his party's support of it. We know that the Government inquiry into matters concerning the escape of Phillip John Smith was the basis of this bill. One of the previous speakers from the Green Party quoted some comments to say that the risk of this happening was minuscule and he stated that this bill is an overreach. I think that when a convicted paedophile who as the member Stuart Nash mentioned goes on to murder the child's father and then escape New Zealand it should not be described as a minuscule concern. When somebody like that with that level of depravity but also ingenuity escapes the Corrections regime it must be a matter of great concern.The Government instituted an inquiry that presented 39 different recommendations the vast majority of which were fully adopted and then Corrections before any further bill was presented to address some of the concerns of that inquiry adopted 13 of those recommendations to bring change. I think the people of New Zealand the taxpayers of New Zealand and the communities of New Zealand require this sort of response. It is not an overreach. It is like when you have a net and you cast it out and you gather in fish—if there is one hole in that net it loses the catch. It is up to us who legislate here in this House to ensure that we have a net that does not let that fish out as Phillip John Smith was able to escape.Immigration New Zealand already has biometric information - sharing agreements with nations of the world and that is important because we want to stop identity fraud which is essentially what happened in this case. It is important that information sharing amongst agencies within this country within our Government and regulatory regime are able to share information to ensure that when people are placed in prison because of acts that they do they are held to account not only for the protection of the population but also for the process of rehabilitation as well. That is very important. And as we know there were multiple identities taking place—yes a very clever person. This House must be smarter than the smartest of criminals if we are going to have a regime that protects the people of New Zealand.So this bill is an appropriate response to those concerns that were highlighted. It is not an overreach; it is an appropriate response. I commend this bill and I commend Minister Amy Adams for bringing it to the House. I trust that we will progress it. Thank you for the support of those parties across this House that are supporting it. I commend it to the House. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Marama Davidson—5 minutes.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): I stand today in support of the Enhancing Identity Verification and Border Processes Legislation Bill in its second reading. This bill is in the name of the Hon Amy Adams and is a result of the Government inquiry into the matters concerning the escape of Phillip John Smith or Traynor who managed to acquire a passport leave New Zealand and end up in Brazil while on temporary release from prison. The inquiry found that it was the inadequate sharing of information between various agencies that enabled this escape to take place as well as some operational processes that were also inadequate.This legislative change is supporting the improvements that have already been made to some of those operational processes. In particular Corrections has implemented 13 of the recommendations after it conducted an urgent review around this issue such as making temporary release of prisoners a much more rigorous process.This is an omnibus bill as we have heard today. It amends and strengthens requirements that must be satisfied before Ministers can make Orders in Council. The amended Acts are the Victims' Rights Act of 2002 the Sentencing Act of 2002 the Parole Act of 2002 and the Corrections Act of 2004 as well as the Human Rights Act and the Privacy Act.This bill will streamline how various agencies must work together to identify offenders and it will ensure that their sentences are carried out properly. It also clarifies the ability for Customs to collect and use biometric information about people arriving into or departing from New Zealand. The bill moves away from the simple name-based information that agencies currently hold in their records to a shared identity based on information that cannot be altered such as a person's fingerprints or facial recognition technology. This is what is known as biometric information.The public does expect their Government to be able to share information for the purposes of keeping communities safe and to prevent harm and also prevent the type of escape from justice that initiated this bill. This bill does contribute to the Government's priority of delivering better public services by reducing crime and reoffending and as such I have pleasure in commending this bill to the House.
Mallard TrevorENHANCING IDENTITY VERIFICATION AND BORDER PROCESSES LEGISLATION BILLSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 22 June.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): When we were last considering this bill Stuart Nash was on his feet. He had 9 minutes and 30 seconds but seeing as he was so nice to me and the clock does not work any other way he can have 10 minutes.
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): I commend the bill to the House.Bill read a third time.
Outer Space and High-altitudes Activities Bill — Third Reading
Young JonathanJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): I am hoping to take a little bit more time than the previous speaker Kennedy Graham. One thing that I think is worth noting is the Government's Business Growth Agenda paving the way for innovation to be strongly embraced in our economy. This bill is very much part of that. The emerging New Zealand - based space economy aligns with innovation streams in our Business Growth Agenda.One group that has recently been awarded the opportunity to set up a regional research institute is the Central Otago – based Centre for Space Science Technology. Its work is going to be about undertaking research around imaging and spaced-based measurements and satellite imagery unique to New Zealand's region. An example of this is the offshore industry off Taranaki because part of the consortium of the Centre for Space Science Technology is MetOcean Solutions based in my city New Plymouth. It is a company that measures wave and ocean currents and enables industries such as the offshore oil and gas industry to make decisions around deployment of offload vessels drilling schedules and the like. The work that it does not only for this industry but for many offshore activities is increasingly based around space technology satellite imagery.When this Central Otago - based Centre for Space Science Technology works with a consortium including MetOcean Solutions based in New Plymouth and starts to do its work to enable regional New Zealand to better utilise its resources and better drive its economy around understanding weather patterns we are going to see some of the advantages of this bill and the likes of the recent endeavours of Mr Beck and his work have great fruition for New Zealand; not just entering into this space economy around the world but—as I think one of the previous speakers Todd Muller said—the advantage of $600 million to $1.5 billion for the New Zealand economy over the next 20 years.I think there are some great advantages. This is a fantastic piece of legislation that is enabling New Zealand to enter into that innovation space internationally. I commend this bill to the House.
Graham KennedyDr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green): I just want to reaffirm that the Green Party will be supporting and voting for the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill in the third reading. Much has been said since the first reading on this subject. I could spend a lot of time addressing the subject and I shall not.
Rurawhe AdrianADRIAN RURAWHE (Labour—Te Tai Hauāuru): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te W'are. It is a great privilege to speak on the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill in its third reading. First of all like a number of colleagues in the House I just want to acknowledge again Rocket Lab and in particular its CEO Peter Beck and his entire team for their tenacity their innovation and their drive to get the project to where it is today which of course requires that we have some legislation to allow that to happen.Just briefly speaking on the purpose of the bill it is as others have noted to facilitate the development of the space industry in New Zealand and also to implement our international obligations which are many. I also want to touch again as I did at the Committee stage on the peaceful purposes for developing the space industry. We come from a country New Zealand in which we are very proud of our history of upholding peaceful purposes—I understand those particular words were not used but there are none the less some strong changes that have been made to the bill to ensure that these space adventures might I say cannot be used for war for nuclear weapons or for other weapons as well. I commend the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee for that.I also recognise that through this bill and through the Rocket Lab initiative—they do create opportunities for the future. In particular I certainly hope that there are strong opportunities—for young people in particular—through education. We are no doubt going to need different kinds of skilled people in the future—engineers IT people—and I think this is certainly a project that can help enhance the opportunities for young people in the future. We certainly do need that in our country. It is a country where we currently have 90000 young people between the ages of 15 and 25 not in education not in employment and not in training. So any kind of opportunity we can develop to assist young people in particular to get into innovative new industries like this one—we should take every opportunity. That is why on this side of the House we are certainly supporting this bill.I also think that we should learn the lessons of the Labour Party's Future of Work Commission in light of this particular bill. The nature of work is changing and we need more innovation in this country. I congratulate those who had the foresight many years ago to assist this project. As I said my hope is that these kinds of projects in light of the outcomes of the Future of Work Commission develop way more opportunities to fill the many gaps that have been created because we have not had the foresight to do that before.It is my privilege to speak on this bill. I commend again Rocket Lab and all those who have been involved in this project. Kia ora.
Goodhew Jo; Mallard TrevorHon JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata): I too join in in essence with the rest of the members in the House in being pleased to be witnessing such wholehearted support for this bill the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill. We have got to the third reading now and I imagine that it is rare to see such a united force. But what does intrigue me a little and I said this I think in my second reading speech—great ideas have many authors do they not? But in fact we need to put this great idea at the feet of the people that Peter Beck works with and with him the man. In doing so we need to recognise that the Parliament's place is in wrapping the legislation that is required around such amazing endeavours. We have done so and I must say—although I was a member of the committee for only part of the process—I have learnt a lot. I am not only intrigued but awestruck by some of the knowledge of the previous speaker for the Green Party Gareth Hughes about this. It is clearly an area that he enjoys an awful lot. We have already talked about the tech sector and its worth to New Zealand—$16 billion of GDP and growing fast. But what is required is not only that the Parliament as it has done in this case passes the legislation to wrap around—both in New Zealand and the international connection through treaties etc.—but also that it provides the safeguards and everything that is required and is far-sighted. I endorse other members who have talked about needing to play the long game here. I take issue with the previous speaker Darroch Ball saying that New Zealand is not getting returns. When New Zealand succeeds on the world stage it gets a reputation for being a place where technology succeeds. That is what brings new investment to New Zealand. That brings jobs to New Zealand. That keeps scientists in New Zealand—technology innovators and those who want to have an exciting job creating new and unthought-of innovations. The work that has been done to support the tech sector and this project as well is happening within the Business Growth Agenda. Other parties will have other ways of addressing that and we have heard some of those here today but the Business Growth Agenda wraps the sort of support that is required in our economy entirely around a project like this.I do want to finish by saying that I hope that if Peter Beck is reading the Hansard—which is now however many years old—he does not at all feel that this House has lectured him in any way shape or form. In fact we need to provide support not just now but into the future to a man who has been very far-sighted and who has created something New Zealand can be proud of. Although we have got a great geographic location for sending these satellites up into space they are just the beginning of what can be a fantastic business here in New Zealand. Rocket Lab is innovative technology that we as New Zealanders will take great pride in although the pat on the back is certainly deservedly going to Peter Beck. I thank you and commend this bill to the House. The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Adrian Rurawhe—5-minute speech.
Ball DarrochDARROCH BALL (NZ First): It is a pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First and my colleague Fletcher Tabuteau who saw this bill through its progress through the House and sat on the select committee as well to speak on the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill. I am just going to take a very quick call and reiterate a couple of the points that New Zealand First has made throughout the progress of this bill through the House.I have to say firstly that 3 years ago I never really envisaged myself standing in the House and talking about anything to do with outer space so it is quite unique and an exciting and fun time for this country—and for me as well speaking about it. It has already been mentioned that we are one of now only 11 countries that have the capability of launching rockets into space. I think that is a very good thing. It is a very exciting thing for this country and we need to make sure that we have the legislation to ensure that everything is OK to do that.There are a number of things that this legislation does but three of the main ones are to facilitate the development of the space industry in New Zealand and that is a great thing; to codify international obligations ticking the boxes; and also to manage our liability that arises from those obligations. As we move into the modern age we have the ability now in New Zealand to really be able to be at the forefront of that movement and to lead changes. We always use new and developing and evolving technologies and this legislation will be able to help us use and develop that technology. More and more we are going to need to use and access space and the ability to put rockets up into space and Rocket Lab was the main instigator I guess of this legislation.There is one point that Fletcher Tabuteau did bring up previously and that is our party's disappointment with the Rocket Lab situation where this Government put millions of dollars into the investment of Rocket Lab only to have Rocket Lab sold overseas to the US and there was no return to the taxpayer of New Zealand. So we need to ensure that when we do develop that technology and the market and different companies—we need to ensure in the future that we do get returns in New Zealand and for New Zealand entrepreneurs and New Zealand companies.Another point was that New Zealand First is happy with the wording of the legislation. It is in quite a flexible way that the legislation has been written and developed by the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee. That is obviously due to the rapidly evolving nature of the technology and this legislation will be able to account for that. Again we must ensure that for any development within New Zealand we must have a priority and a focus on New Zealand businesses and New Zealand benefits.New Zealand First congratulates the committee of which Fletcher Tabuteau was a part. This is a great piece of legislation looking forward and into the future and New Zealand First supports it wholeheartedly. Thank you.
SpeechThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Just before I call the member Darroch Ball I am going to just indicate to members that the House rules are very clear that members do not use the phone function of cellphones when the House is sitting. There are a number of members who have phones at their desks for particular purposes—senior members and whips—and my ruling is that members can use those phones but not cell phones while the House is sitting.
Speaker's Statements — New Zealand Hansard—150th Anniversary
Carter DavidTUESDAY 4 JULY 2017Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.SPEAKER'S STATEMENTSNew Zealand Hansard—150th AnniversaryMr SPEAKER: Members this month marks 150 years since the establishment of the New Zealand Hansard the record of parliamentary debates. As one of the earliest parliaments to establish a Hansard service independent of the executive New Zealand has a longstanding tradition of providing a transparent record of parliamentary proceedings. This plays a valuable role in making the work of this House accessible to all New Zealanders. I note that 2017 is also the 20th anniversary of the Hansard including speeches delivered in Te Reo Māori along with their translations. I am sure members would wish to acknowledge this occasion.[Applause]
Thursday 6 July 2017 - Volume 723
Children Young Persons and Their Families (Oranga Tamariki) Legislation Bill and Vulnerable Children Amendment Bill — Third Readings
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Oranga Tamariki) Legislation Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 60New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 59New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Bill read a third time.A party vote was called for on the question That the Vulnerable Children Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 60New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 59New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Bill read a third time.
12. Budget 2017—Auckland Schools CapacityDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National) to the Associate Minister of EducationBudget 2017—Auckland Schools Capacity12. Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National) to the Associate Minister of Education: What recent announcements has he made following Budget 2017 in regards to increasing capacity at Auckland schools?Hon TIM MACINDOE (Associate Minister of Education): Recently the Hon Nikki Kaye and I were pleased to announce that in the first tranche of roll growth funding from Budget 2017 eight Auckland schools will receive a combined $21 million to build 41 classrooms. This will see 34 new classrooms to increase capacity by around 680 student places and seven replacement classrooms. I am very pleased to inform both Dr Parmar and Mr Wood that Dominion Road School in the Mt Roskill electorate is set to receive $2 million to fund four new classrooms.Grant Robertson: I apologise. I meant to do this at the end of my question. I seek leave of the House to table a letter written on 29 May 2017 by nine former trustees of the Community Trust of Southland to Amy Adams urging an urgent investigation into happenings at the trust.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular letter. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Simon O'Connor: How will this investment benefit Auckland schools and their pupils?Hon TIM MACINDOE: The eight Auckland schools receiving new and replacement classrooms include two in the Tāmaki electorate represented by Simon O'Connor. These are Meadowbank School which will be getting four new classrooms and St Thomas School which will be getting nine classrooms five of which will be new and four being replacement classrooms. This also follows our announcement a few weeks ago that Stonefield School also in the member's electorate will receive funding for expansion. Pupils from Beachlands School Bairds Mainfreight Primary School Rowandale School Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Te Kotuku and Onehunga Primary School will also benefit from new modern classrooms to help them to learn and achieve to the best of their ability. The good news is that this is just tranche one of roll growth funding announcements for Auckland and we still have two more tranches to come.
Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers (continued)
10. Meat Industry—Chilled Meat Exports to ChinaALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa) to the Minister for Primary IndustriesMeat Industry—Chilled Meat Exports to China10. ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa) to the Minister for Primary Industries: How is the Government supporting red meat farmers to extract better value out of their produce?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries): Last Friday at Auckland Airport I celebrated the first consignments of chilled red meat leave for China as a result of a successful 6-month trial negotiated by the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI). Chilled meat is worth around twice the value of frozen meat and this is great news for our processors and farmers. These first shipments were air freighted and utilise new air links established between our countries on the back of significant tourism growth.Alastair Scott: How is the Government supporting red meat farmers to create more value inside the farm gate? Hon NATHAN GUY: I have just given one example of that in the answer to the primary question. Of course the Government is partnering with the red meat industry to develop and select sheep that also thrive in hill country and are higher in healthier and tastier fats. Te Mana Lamb was launched by the Prime Minister recently in Hong Kong and it is on the menu in top restaurants here in New Zealand. The programme is part of the Government's Primary Growth Partnership. This Government is co-investing $25 million into this initiative and it has already received very positive reviews.Richard Prosser: If Chinese chilled meat exports only started after Silver Fern Farms fell into Chinese control and red meat exports in the year to May 2017 are down 9.3 percent—or $616 million—can farmers summarise National's plan as We're not retreating; we're just advancing in a different direction."?Hon NATHAN GUY: No they cannot. I know that New Zealand First has a very protectionist policy and is afraid of New Zealand actually reaching out to international countries that we actually welcome investing here. What the member should be aware of is that 10 plants have been listed for export of chilled meat into China not just Silver Fern Farms."
8. Drugs Policy—Law Reform and EnforcementJULIE ANNE GENTER (Green) to the Prime MinisterDrugs Policy—Law Reform and Enforcement8. JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green) to the Prime Minister: Why did he say that prisons are a moral and fiscal failure"?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Because that is his view.Julie Anne Genter: Given that view will his Government implement the proposal released yesterday by the New Zealand Drug Foundation including the recommendations of the 2011 Law Commission report Controlling and Regulating Drugs so we can stop incarcerating people for minor drug offences?Hon PAULA BENNETT: No because it is simply not true that our jails are overflowing with drug offenders. The vast majority of people in prison for drug offences are manufacturers or distributors.Julie Anne Genter: Given that we spent $268 million in 2014-15 on enforcing our drug laws and only $78 million—a tiny fraction of that—on drug addiction - related health interventions does he agree that there is an opportunity to help people with their additions rather than locking them up?Hon PAULA BENNETT: There are two parts to that. The first part is that actually most of that money is being spent on clan-labs and those who are actually manufacturing and distributing things like P. So that is what that money is being spent on. But on the educational side I am for that. I think that we can do more on the educational side of making sure that New Zealanders know the effects of addiction and how we can actually help them get off it.Julie Anne Genter: I seek leave to table data that I received from the New Zealand Drug Foundation that shows that more money is spent for cannabis-related offences than for P.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that information. Is there any objection to it being tabled? There is not.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Julie Anne Genter: Will he take an evidence-based approach to regulating the personal use of cannabis as experts at the Drug Foundation symposium have been urging here in Parliament all this week?Hon PAULA BENNETT: My beliefs are that I do not believe in the liberalisation of cannabis.Julie Anne Genter: Given that the evidence is all there that it will save us money it will help people it will reduce harm and the New Zealand public supports it why will this Government not listen to the evidence and finally modernise our drug laws?Hon PAULA BENNETT: Because there is a mix of evidence and we are quite clear on where we stand on it."
7. Pacific Peoples—Recognised Seasonal Employer SchemeTODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty) to the Minister of Foreign AffairsPacific Peoples—Recognised Seasonal Employer Scheme7. TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: How is the Government supporting Pacific labour mobility?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Foreign Affairs): On Tuesday the eve of the 10th anniversary of the Recognised Seasonal Employer (RSE) scheme the Minister of Immigration and I announced a $10 million new funding expansion for the Pacific labour mobility scheme. This along with $5 million of funding for the training of Pacific workers in New Zealand was announced as part of the PACER-Plus trade deal and delivers $15 million over the next 5 years to help New Zealand businesses while improving the lives of people in the Pacific and strengthening Pacific economies. The RSE scheme has been a huge success for New Zealand business tens of thousands of Pacific Islanders and the countries they travel from each year.Todd Muller: How successful has the Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme been?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Since the scheme's inception 60000 visas have been issued to Pacific workers who have taken up seasonal employment in New Zealand's orchards and vineyards. These jobs improve standards and productivity in New Zealand. They also generate $40 million in remittances back to the Island countries. I have recently visited Fiji and Tonga where I learnt firsthand the appreciation of the scheme in those countries. Their New Zealand income has enabled them to build more resilient homes send their children to school and contribute to their own community development. Countries involved in the labour mobility scheme have seen household incomes and school attendance rise. There is increasing access to health services reduced unemployment and overall less reliance on foreign aid.Todd Muller: What changes to the Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme are being explored?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The Government has approved $10 million over an initial 5-year period to explore labour mobility opportunities in new sectors where there is continued high demand for workers. In particular the Government will be exploring employment opportunities for Pacific women and developing prospects in semi-skilled higher-income occupations. The programme will continue to support growth in existing sectors and will develop labour mobility opportunities in new sectors such as construction fisheries and tourism. It is designed to be flexible to respond to new opportunities in our dynamic labour market. We have already commenced a pilot programme for Pacific carpenters who are currently working on the Canterbury rebuild. We are confident that hard-working Pacific people will be in high demand from employers across the new sectors.
4. Social Housing Wellington—Housing DevelopmentBRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister for Social HousingSocial Housing Wellington—Housing Development4. BRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister for Social Housing: What recent announcements has she made regarding social housing in Wellington?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister for Social Housing): Today I announced that work has begun on 145 new social housing units to be built across five Wellington sites. This is a significant building programme that will help drive a transformation of our Wellington social houses creating modern fit-for-purpose homes. This represents an investment of $48.5 million and is part of our ongoing commitment to grow and improve our social housing stock across New Zealand.Brett Hudson: What sorts of tenants are these new social houses designed for?Hon AMY ADAMS: All of these new homes will be one-bedroom units which is the main type of home needed in Wellington to respond to social housing demand at the moment which is increasingly from single people and couples without children. In addition the new homes at Hanson Street have been specifically designed for people with disabilities as they will be located close to the hospital social service agencies shops and bus routes. They are fully accessible and have a number of features like designated mobility scooter parking and charging areas.Grant Robertson: Can the Minister confirm that the 34 flats to be built on the McLean Flats site in central Wellington were in fact announced on 13 September 2014; why has there been no activity since then?Hon AMY ADAMS: Because redeveloping a building of that scale happens in several stages and what we are announcing today is that the work as it says in my release Mr Robertson is commencing today. Before you commence the work you get a resource consent you do a design you get funding and you talk to the community. We announced we were starting that. Now we are announcing that we are starting the building.Hon Peter Dunne: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It was impossible to hear anything of that answer beyond the words Mr Speaker" because of the noise. I wonder whether the Minister could repeat it.Mr SPEAKER: It is not unreasonable because I have no idea what the answer was because of the howling from my immediate left. So I am going to invite the Minister if she wants to to conclude the answer but it will be without any interjection whatsoever from the members on my left.Hon AMY ADAMS: Mr Speaker thank you. I am very happy to advise the House that the process of building a large development like is happening at McLean Flats and like is happening at the five sites across Wellington is a multifaceted process that begins with resource consenting funding designing and consulting with the community. What we have announced today—as we have said very clearly in the release—is that work is today beginning on the construction."
Doocey Matt; Mallard TrevorMATT DOOCEY (Third Whip—National): I seek leave of the House to adjourn early.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Is anyone going to be foolish enough to object to that? No. It is so agreed.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 5.56 p.m.
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): I commend the legislation to the House.
Pugh Maureen; Mallard TrevorMAUREEN PUGH (National): I stand in support of the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Oranga Tamariki) Legislation Bill today in its third and final reading. I do acknowledge the Hon Anne Tolley for her passion and her absolute commitment to do the very best for our most vulnerable young people. It is indeed a privilege to be speaking in support of this bill as it nears the end of its parliamentary process.In one way this is a very positive step but on the other hand I take my colleague Marama Fox's point that it is a sad day when we actually need this type of legislation. In an ideal world ideally we would not hurt each other—people would not hurt each other—but sadly they continue to do so. So what these reforms set out to do is to break that cycle of violence and neglect within families and empower families and young people to find a better way. We are all looking forward to the transformational change that this bill will deliver—that it ensures the long-term positive outcomes for our most vulnerable children and young people; positive long-term outcomes that our young people deserve. This is nothing less than they deserve and our support systems are now reconfiguring to ensure that our most vulnerable children and young people and their families are supported to give them the best chance that a child-centred State care and protection system can provide. I have great pleasure in commending this bill to the House.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Michael Wood—5-minute call.
Hayes JoJOANNE HAYES (National): I rise to support the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Oranga Tamariki) Legislation Bill and the Vulnerable Children Amendment Bill in their third readings. These bills represent the most far-reaching reform to the Children Young Persons and Their Families Act 1989 since it was introduced 30 years ago. Why? Because the expert panel after its research found that the old system did not place children at the centre of its services. It did not meet the needs of vulnerable children it was fragmented it lacked clear accountability and it was not organised around a common purpose.Last night when we were going through the Committee of the whole House I felt that the debate was very rigorous and vigorous. People got to say what they needed to say and I want to thank them all for that. I especially want to thank Ron Mark and Ria Bond for sharing their stories with us as wards of the State back in those days as young children who due to issues in their families were placed under care with foster parents. I applaud Ron Mark's proposal this afternoon in the House lauding the foster parents of children—who looked after him and Ria Bond and others.It has been an interesting time in the Social Services Committee as Carmel said with over 440 written and oral submissions of which 98 came to the select committee. We heard what they had to say and those were very interesting comments that they made.I want to also point out some of the areas around the purpose and principles of the Act that give explicit recognition to the Treaty of Waitangi and especially to our mana tamaiti mana tamariki whakapapa and whanaungatanga for tamariki Māori. That is very very key to this bill and I want to applaud the Minister and the expert panel for actually making sure that this is part and parcel of the Oranga Tamariki bill.I will not go on because I am going to lose my voice very shortly. All I have to say is that I am very proud of the work that the Minister has done and of what the select committee has gone through. I commend the legislation to the House. Kia ora.
Mallard TrevorThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The question is that this House apologise to those homosexual New Zealanders who were convicted for consensual adult activity and recognise the tremendous hurt and suffering those men and their families have gone through and the continued effects the convictions have had on them.Motion agreed to.
Criminal Records (Expungement of Convictions for Historical Homosexual Offences) Bill — First Reading
Naylor Jono; Tisch LindsayJONO NAYLOR (National): It has been interesting to listen to the debate as it has been going through so far this afternoon. I was thinking back to 1986 when the law passed to actually legalise homosexual behaviour. In 1986 I was a 19-year-old Massey University student who wore gumboots to lectures. I do not actually recall what my views were at the time. Seriously—I remember the issue going on but I cannot actually recall what my personal views about it were although New Zealand was clearly divided at the time. The fact that I cannot recall which way I thought about it obviously suggests to me that it was not important enough for me personally at that stage to engage with it. I was happy enough to march against the Springbok Tour—that got my blood to boil—but sadly this issue I guess did not get me out of bed to do something about it.I say that because right now I have got a 19-year-old son who also attends Massey University. Thankfully he is smart enough that he does not wear gumboots to lectures and is a little more sophisticated than I ever was at that age. But it is fantastic I think that my son has grown up in a society in New Zealand where it is inconceivable to him that actually this behaviour was ever against the law and I am grateful that as a society we have moved on to the point where we can understand that this law should never have been in place in the first place.It was a privilege to be a part of the Justice and Electoral Committee and to hear submitters on the Wiremu Demchick petition because we heard some stories that would make most people's blood curdle. It was just horrible to hear of some of the things that some men were subjected to because of the laws of New Zealand. I think as a nation we have got to stand up now and say that was not OK. It was never OK that they should ever have been convicted in the first place and the way they were treated afterwards definitely was not OK. There was that old L V Martin ad back in the 1980s as well where he said: If something's not right I'll put it right because it's the putting right that matters."We can never eliminate the experiences that those people had at the hands of the New Zealand law—we cannot undo it. But we can apologise we can ensure that it never happens again and we can ensure by passing this legislation that those convictions that they had no longer victimise them because they have to keep declaring it.This is a good bill. It is an important apology. I commend it to the House and while the chances are that I will not be here when it goes through the Justice and Electoral Committee I have full confidence in the Parliament of New Zealand in this age and this time to do the right thing. I commend this bill to the House.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Marama Davidson—5 minutes."
Dowie SarahSARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): It truly is an honour and a privilege to rise in support of this motion of apology and in favour of the Criminal Records (Expungement of Convictions for Historical Homosexual Offences) Bill in its first reading. The significance of this day is not lost on me. It is significant for New Zealand. It is significant for the LGBT community and it goes to start the process of healing to start overcoming some of the hurt that these men have experienced and some of the prejudice that these men have experienced. They were consenting adults but were convicted of a crime.Quite frankly I cannot imagine a New Zealand back in the day when if you were a consenting adult you could not love a person because they were the same sex or they may have been from a different race or whatever the prejudice may have been. I certainly cannot imagine a New Zealand back in those times. To live through that must have been incredibly distressing to be punished for it must have been horrific and the ramifications of such convictions must have been life changing as those men walked through life. But as I said this is a significant day for New Zealand for the LGBT community and for this House as we start to right the wrongs of the past and move forward.I am very very pleased to be the chair of the Justice and Electoral Committee to lead this process as we do so and I want to pay tribute to the Justice and Electoral Committee members who have heard from Wiremu Demchick the petitioner who called for this very subject to be investigated—for us as a committee too to visit Australia to look at their expungement schemes on this issue to compare and contrast. I feel that our collegial committee is best placed to start looking at the issues of these schemes to look at the advantages and disadvantages to look at the evidence on the papers to look at evidence on the balance of probabilities and to look at some of the old offences that some of these men were charged with and see what that would bring about and what that would look like as a final scheme for expungement. I feel that we are best placed to debate that fairly and to look at that in an analytical way to bring about the best result for these people who have been subjected to this prejudice which we all know is as I said before distressing and quite wrong.So I look forward to this bill coming to our select committee. I look forward to us calling for submissions including what the petitioner has brought to our committee by way of information and processing them and working collegially to get the best result for these people and for New Zealand moving forward. As such again I say it is a significant day for New Zealand and the LGBT community and I commend this bill to the House.
Points of Order — Business Statement—Date of Appropriation (2017/18 Supplementary Estimates) Bill