edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Goldsmith Paul: International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoldsmith Paul: International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7751. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs) on behalf of theMinister of Finance:I move That the International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill be now read a second time. Following the first reading the bill was examined by the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee which recommended that it be passed with one amendment. There were no submissions on the bill.The purpose of the bill is to amend the International Finance Agreements Act 1961 in order to enable the Government of New Zealand to become a member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. The bank is a multilateral investment bank established to address the gap in infrastructure investment across the Asian region. Its purpose is to foster sustainable economic development and to promote regional cooperation and partnership including by working in partnership with other multilateral and bilateral development institutions.New Zealand is joining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank as a founding member to contribute to strong and sustained regional growth consolidate New Zealand’s economic and political relationships in Asia and participate in an institution that will further regional economic cooperation and integration. Through our involvement in the negotiations we have seen emerge a genuinely multilateral 21st century institution. We have an opportunity to play our part in this important new institution in our region.The bill gives certain articles of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank articles of agreement force of law in New Zealand. The bill provides for extending various privileges and immunities to the bank. It provides an exemption from taxation for the bank and it provides for permanent legislative authority to meet payments due under the agreement. These provisions are consistent with the treatment New Zealand provides to other international financial institutions in the Act.The Government accepts the committee’s recommendation to delete clause 9(1) and (1A) of the bill. Clause 9(1) of the bill as introduced would give article 19(1) of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank articles of agreement force of law in New Zealand. Article 19(1) prohibits members of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank from imposing restrictions on currencies held or used by the bank or a recipient of the bank for payment. Officials have recognised that it is not necessary to give article 19(1) force of law in New Zealand for the following reasons. The obligations in article 19(1) do not need to have effect domestically and would be inconsistent with New Zealand’s treatment of other international financial institutions in the Act.I want to thank the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee and officials for their work. I commend this bill to the House.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Security Intelligence Service—Annual Report by Inspector-General of Intelligence and SecurityText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Security Intelligence Service—Annual Report by Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7751. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from James Shaw seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the findings in the annual report of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security.The findings are a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The big hurdle to get over in applications for urgent debates is whether the matter has reached the stage where the business of the House ought to be set aside. The test is a high one. There must be an element of urgency or substantive policy change for the matter to take precedence over other business. Although the report indicates there are some areas for improvement in the operation of the SIS I am not persuaded that the setting aside of the business of the House for an urgent debate can be justified today.One factor in deciding whether to allow an urgent debate is that the intelligence and security agencies are subject to very little parliamentary scrutiny. I note that the report states that the inspector-general is undertaking several inquiries into important aspects of the operations of the security and intelligence agencies. The final reports on those inquiries may warrant the attention of the House depending on their findings. The application today is therefore declined.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7748. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister of Transport: What updates can he provide on the Southern Corridor Motorway improvements project in Auckland?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): The $268 million project which is part of the Government’s accelerated Auckland roading programme will make improvements to State Highway 1 between Manukau and Papakura by adding 11 kilometres of extra lanes to improve capacity and traffic flow. It will also include an upgrade of the Takanini interchange. The improvements will tackle congestion and keep traffic flowing along the southern motorway and ensure that the motorway is ready to support the rapid population growth that has been happening—[Interruption]—and is expected in South Auckland over the next 30 years. As the member next to me Steven Joyce points out they will also support many electric vehicles well into the future.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: How will the southern corridor motorway improvement project benefit road users in Auckland?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: As the transport economists amongst us may like to know this has a massive benefit-cost ratio of some 6:9 as a project. As a key transport route for Auckland the southern corridor forms a strategic link between the western ring route State Highway 20 and State Highway 16 the airport and the Greater Auckland area. It is going to improve the movement of people and freight locally but also from Northland through Auckland to the Waikato Tauranga as well as further south to the rest of New Zealand. Accelerating improvement to the southern motorway as well as projects at Kirkbride Road on the Northern Motorway and the East West Connections will help ensure that the key routes in the city continue to meet the future transport needs of a growing and dynamic Auckland City.
Mark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7745. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): Thank you Mr Speaker. My question is to the—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I will not hesitate to ask the member on my right-hand side to be leaving. The member has a right to ask a question.
Korako Nuk: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKorako Nuk: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7743. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.NUK KORAKO (National) to the Minister of Health: Can he confirm that Canterbury District Health Board is receiving an extra $16 million in funding which acknowledges Canterbury’s unique circumstances and will see the DHB break even for the 2015/16 year?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Yes I can. The Government has decided to give Canterbury District Health Board an additional $16 million in funding to ensure that it is well placed to continue delivering high-quality services to patients. In response to issues that the district health board has raised with me I asked PricewaterhouseCoopers to carry out a financial review so as to gain a fuller understanding of the district health board’s position. The PricewaterhouseCoopers review found that although the district health board has a stable financial position drivers of future cost relate to the operating cost of the $1 billion hospitals redevelopment and the unique circumstances in Canterbury. The $16 million is in recognition of those cost pressures and it means that the district health board will break even this year.Nuk Korako: What other assistance has the Government provided Canterbury District Health Board as it rebuilds from the earthquakes?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The Government is investing heavily in Canterbury in order to assist the region to rebuild after the earthquakes. This week I visited the Burwood Hospital construction site which together with the redevelopment of Christchurch Hospital is a $650 million investment in Canterbury health facilities. In addition we have provided funding support totalling $70 million and have boosted mental health services and the district health board is delivering more services for patients such as the 50 percent increase in elective operation numbers.Hon Annette King: Why did he need to put PricewaterhouseCoopers into Canterbury District Health Board at considerable cost to the taxpayer to find out that it needed additional funding when the district health board told him and his ministry back in November 2014 of its circumstances but was disbelieved?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Because it was necessary to do the analysis.
Naylor Jono: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7740. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.JONO NAYLOR (National) to the Minister for Social Development: What is the Government doing to support beneficiaries to find work as part of Budget 2015?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): Today I announced that 40000 more intensive case management places have been made available for beneficiaries following the funding boost in Budget 2015. The increase means that the number of clients supported has increased from 80000 to 120000. These increased services will be focused for sole parents and for jobseekers with health conditions and disabilities who want to work but need some extra support and guidance.Jono Naylor: How does work-focused case management fit within the Government’s plan in Budget 2015 to support New Zealanders off benefits and into work?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Work-focused case management is just one of the tools that this Government is using to support New Zealanders off welfare. Budget 2015 also includes initiatives such as expanding the 3K to Christchurch scheme and increasing funding for the out-of-school care and recreation childcare subsidy to remove barriers for parents moving into work. We have already seen the number of children in a benefit-dependent household reduce by over 42000 in the past 3 years and the number of sole parents on a benefit is down by almost 22 percent over that same time. This Government is doing more to try to help these clients off welfare and into work so they and their families can lead successful lives.Darroch Ball: How can she say that she is supporting youth beneficiaries into work when she is contributing to the rise of youth unemployment to a shameful 22 percent by reducing funding for the likes of the highly successful youth Limited Service Volunteers programme?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Well on the contrary of course we can say that we are supporting young people into work and off benefits. We have a very successful youth services programme that provides wraparound intensive support to young people and we have the Limited Service Volunteers scheme which is a suitable scheme for a number of young people. We increased the numbers during the global financial crisis because more young people were out of work. Now that the crisis is over we have restored it to its original numbers and we are continuing to use it in partnership with the Defence Force.
Delahunty Catherine: Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon HaiyanText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDelahunty Catherine: Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon Haiyan[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7735. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate to recognise the second anniversary of the strongest tropical cyclone in recorded history Typhoon Haiyan—Mr SPEAKER: Order! You have described what you are seeking leave for. I will put the leave. Leave is sought to move that motion without debate. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Carter David: Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon HaiyanText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon Haiyan[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7735. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. The member cannot seek leave on behalf of another member. [Interruption] Order! [Interruption] Order! No the member will resume his seat. Equally those people sitting near Mr Seymour should not carry on a conversation across the floor of this House.
Seymour David: Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon HaiyanText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSeymour David: Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon Haiyan[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7735. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I seek leave for the member to make an apology—
Seymour David: Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon HaiyanText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSeymour David: Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon Haiyan[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7735. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is with specific regard to Standing Order 120 “Personal reflections”. May I preface this point of order by saying I understand that points of order should be raised at the first available opportunity. In light of these circumstances that is what I am doing. I think Mr Speaker that you will see that the nature of this issue says that it must be dealt with.On Tuesday night during the shop trading hours debate a member told two other members that if they do not like New Zealand they should go back to the countries whence they came. I believe that this brings this House into serious disrepute—that an elected New Zealand citizen should be reflected upon personally and have views imputed upon them according to their ethnic background. That is wrong. That is a disgrace. The member must stand withdraw and apologise.Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member for his point of order. I am aware generally speaking of the debate. It was certainly a heated debate. I think there were some comments made at the time that were not interrupted by a presiding officer. I think those comments were very unfortunate but the matter has now passed. It is not an issue that I can rule on at this stage.David Seymour: Speaking to the point of order.Mr SPEAKER: I have spoken to the point of order. If the member has a fresh point of order he can raise it but I have made a decision in that regard. Is it a fresh point of order?David Seymour: Only that—Mr SPEAKER: No. I am just warning the member—I do it with all sides of the House—that I have litigated that and the time is past. It is an incident that I think is regrettable it has occurred but I can do no more about it now that it is 24 hours on.
Bridges Simon: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBridges Simon: Business Statement[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7735. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Acting Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 10 November the Government will look to make progress on a number of bills on the Order Paper including the Support for Children in Hardship Bill and the International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill. Wednesday 11 November will be a members’ day.
Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSittings of the House[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7786. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Sittings of the HouseGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I notice that it is fairly close to the end of the sitting day and we will not get through a full speech on the next bill so I seek leave for the House to rise.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Is there any objection? There appears to be no objection.
Urgent Debates Declined — Security Intelligence Service—Annual Report by Inspector-General of Intelligence and SecurityText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUrgent Debates Declined — Security Intelligence Service—Annual Report by Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7751. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Urgent Debates DeclinedSecurity Intelligence Service—Annual Report by Inspector-General of Intelligence and SecurityMr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from James Shaw seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the findings in the annual report of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security.The findings are a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The big hurdle to get over in applications for urgent debates is whether the matter has reached the stage where the business of the House ought to be set aside. The test is a high one. There must be an element of urgency or substantive policy change for the matter to take precedence over other business. Although the report indicates there are some areas for improvement in the operation of the SIS I am not persuaded that the setting aside of the business of the House for an urgent debate can be justified today.One factor in deciding whether to allow an urgent debate is that the intelligence and security agencies are subject to very little parliamentary scrutiny. I note that the report states that the inspector-general is undertaking several inquiries into important aspects of the operations of the security and intelligence agencies. The final reports on those inquiries may warrant the attention of the House depending on their findings. The application today is therefore declined.
Points of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon HaiyanText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ Ethnicity Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon Haiyan[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7735. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Points of OrderPersonal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language—References to Members’ EthnicityDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is with specific regard to Standing Order 120 “Personal reflections”. May I preface this point of order by saying I understand that points of order should be raised at the first available opportunity. In light of these circumstances that is what I am doing. I think Mr Speaker that you will see that the nature of this issue says that it must be dealt with.On Tuesday night during the shop trading hours debate a member told two other members that if they do not like New Zealand they should go back to the countries whence they came. I believe that this brings this House into serious disrepute—that an elected New Zealand citizen should be reflected upon personally and have views imputed upon them according to their ethnic background. That is wrong. That is a disgrace. The member must stand withdraw and apologise.Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member for his point of order. I am aware generally speaking of the debate. It was certainly a heated debate. I think there were some comments made at the time that were not interrupted by a presiding officer. I think those comments were very unfortunate but the matter has now passed. It is not an issue that I can rule on at this stage.David Seymour: Speaking to the point of order.Mr SPEAKER: I have spoken to the point of order. If the member has a fresh point of order he can raise it but I have made a decision in that regard. Is it a fresh point of order?David Seymour: Only that—Mr SPEAKER: No. I am just warning the member—I do it with all sides of the House—that I have litigated that and the time is past. It is an incident that I think is regrettable it has occurred but I can do no more about it now that it is 24 hours on.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I seek leave for the member to make an apology—Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. The member cannot seek leave on behalf of another member. [Interruption] Order! [Interruption] Order! No the member will resume his seat. Equally those people sitting near Mr Seymour should not carry on a conversation across the floor of this House.Leave to Move Motion Without Notice—Anniversary of Typhoon HaiyanCATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate to recognise the second anniversary of the strongest tropical cyclone in recorded history Typhoon Haiyan—Mr SPEAKER: Order! You have described what you are seeking leave for. I will put the leave. Leave is sought to move that motion without debate. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 05 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7735. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 5 November 2015Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Business StatementHon SIMON BRIDGES (Acting Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 10 November the Government will look to make progress on a number of bills on the Order Paper including the Support for Children in Hardship Bill and the International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill. Wednesday 11 November will be a members’ day.
Vote: Third Readings —Text is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Third Readings —[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7729. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Crimes Amendment Bill the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Amendment Bill the Companies Amendment Bill the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Amendment Bill the Customs and Excise Amendment Bill (No 3) the Extradition Amendment Bill the Financial Service Providers (Registration and Dispute Resolution) Amendment Bill the Financial Transactions Reporting Amendment Bill the Income Tax Amendment Bill the Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Amendment Bill the Policing Amendment Bill and the Secret Commissions Amendment 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.Bills read a third time.
Foster-Bell Paul: Third Readings —Text is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Third Readings —[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7728. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā tēnā koutou katoa e ngā mema o Te Whare Pāremata.[Mr Speaker and all members of the House I greet you.]In taking a brief call on the legislation arising from the Organised Crime and Anti-corruption Legislation Bill I would like to say that we are proud on this side of the House that New Zealand remains one of the top one or two least corrupt countries in the world. But we must not rest on our laurels; there is always more to be done. This is a very practical and balanced bill. We have to make sure we do not go too far and put in place restrictive criteria that would make it difficult to observe cultural traditions such as koha gratuities and the presentation of small and appropriate gifts but we do want to make sure that we do not have financial corruption of the sort that is found in other countries in the world.I welcome today the announcement by Transparency International New Zealand that New Zealand is the least corrupt and most transparent country in terms of defence procurement. This goes along with the many other areas of our economy and Government that function in a very transparent way. This bill further advances that cause. I congratulate the Minister Amy Adams and commend the bill to the House.
McKelvie Ian: Third Readings —Text is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Third Readings —[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7726. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): It gives me great pleasure to take a very short call on the bills arising from the Organised Crime and Anti-corruption Legislation Bill at their third readings. The original bill of course went through the select committee that I am part of and it took quite a considerable time I guess for me to get my head around the bill. I think I have said that in here before and got into trouble but it is part of the Government’s response I guess to organised crime basically.The National Government has done some work in the organised crime area already with the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act which commenced some 4 or 5 years ago and also around the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Bill in 2009 which recently commenced—in fact in June 2013. So we have started some work. This is a continuation of this work.This law covers all sorts of crime as the previous speaker mentioned. I think that unfortunately if we all in New Zealand had the same or perhaps a higher level of standards—in fact if we all around the world valued our freedom and the way we behave we would not need legislation like this but unfortunately that is not the case. So I think this piece of legislation is a very good initial response to some significant challenges that we face.Only at lunchtime I sat by a member of the Microsoft team in New Zealand and we were talking about cyber-security. It just shows how the world has changed so dramatically in the last I guess 15 years that we are now needing to protect people’s information effectively in space. So we put the information out there we hope it is stored securely—maybe it is not—and consequently there is a significant amount of work going into ring-fencing that information and trying to keep it secure.The world changes so quickly that we need to keep our legislation ahead of or certainly up with the changes as best we can. This legislation is an effort by the Minister of Justice to do that it took a lot of work from the Law and Order Committee to get it to the point it is at now and I think it will play a very valuable part in the future of protecting New Zealand and New Zealanders from organised crime. Thank you.
Tisch Lindsay: Third Readings —Text is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Third Readings —[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7724. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Denise Roche—5 minutes.
Young Jonathan: Third Readings —Text is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Third Readings —[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7723. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): I am very pleased to stand in support of the legislation arising from the Organised Crime and Anti-corruption Legislation Bill under the name of the Hon Amy Adams Minister of Justice.We have heard a lot of rhetoric today about corruption bribery—using terms like that—and even the previous speaker Mahesh Bindra made a comment that he felt that the Minister was giving way. What needs to be known is that this issue of facilitation payments has not been authorised by this legislation. They have been lawful in New Zealand for many years. In fact this legislation tightens and narrows the application of them.The previous speaker in I think his first or second reading speech made a comment that it is normal practice in many countries of the world that a small facilitation payment—a small payment to facilitate a service—takes place. We can live in our own little glass bubble; we can live in our high moralistic world here and never be able to transact business in some of those other countries without those facilitation payments—we would be at the end of the queue.I remember the very first time that I as a young man went to the United States of America and paid a tip for service. What is acceptable in that culture was foreign to us and I did not like it but I have come to understand that it has become more and more acceptable when we show appreciation for service and we do it in New Zealand quite often.So what has happened in this legislation is that this issue around facilitation payments has been narrowed and tightened quite considerably compared with what existed before under a Labour Government. It is very high and mighty of Labour members to crow from the rooftop on this issue when we are actually doing something more about it because we understand that in the global world of trade progress is being made. We are ensuring that facilitation payments can be applied only in situations where no undue benefit accrues to the person involved. This is what the Minister said in the Committee stage of this legislation. In these situations businesses must record and keep detailed records of any such payments made to ensure that we get the balance right. This is the balance between ensuring proper high standards of business practice in New Zealand and protecting innocent New Zealanders against unintentional criminalisation as they transact business across this world.I believe that for businesses that are going to nations of the world where facilitation payments are normal business practice then we need to put protections around our people so that according to New Zealand law they are not criminalised for entering into normal business practices. I believe that we have got this balance right. I commend the good work of the Minister in this legislation and I commend it to the House.
Carter David: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: General Debate[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7711. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: The member’s time has expired.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7699. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: No. I think on this—[Interruption] I do not need any assistance thank you. The question the member is referring to was asked in that particular question. A suggestion was made which the Minister disputed. That is a legitimate answer to that question. If subsequently information becomes available then it is for the Minister when he becomes aware of that information if he considers it relevant and important enough to come to the House and correct it. I presume the Minister will do so if he sees it relevant.
Hipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7698. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to draw your attention to Speaker’s ruling 200/4 which states that Ministers who make incorrect statements must correct those in the House at the earliest available opportunity. I want to seek your guidance as to whether that applies in a situation where a Minister refuses to answer a question on the basis that they claim that there is an incorrect assertion in the question as was the case with Mr Joyce earlier today and whether once the information has been presented to demonstrate that in fact that was correct he needs to correct that.
O'Connor Simon: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7697. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to the Minister of Transport: What recent progress has been made on the Government’s commitment to build the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive urban cycleway in Auckland?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): I was delighted to recently turn the first sod on the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive urban cycleway which is the biggest urban cycleway to ever start construction to date in New Zealand. The $40 million cycleway is a key project in the Government’s Urban Cycleways Programme. When completed in 2018 it will allow people to walk run or cycle from the east of our biggest city to the harbour and city centre. Can I just also acknowledge the collaboration and great work by the Auckland Council and the New Zealand Transport Agency in starting this transformative project.Simon O’Connor: What benefits will the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive urban cycleway provide for the people of Auckland?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: The Government’s goal is to make cycling a safer and more attractive transport choice. We recognise the rapid growth that Auckland is experiencing. That is why we are investing $200 million in cycling across the city over the next 3 years to make cycling a safer easier and more enjoyable transport option. The Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive urban cycleway will be another significant step towards joining cycleway routes across Auckland. It will ensure that cycling will be an integral part of Auckland’s future transport network contributing to healthier and more environmentally friendly communities.
Smith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7695. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What steps is the Government taking to promote and protect the reputation of New Zealand wine?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): This Government is committed to supporting the wines and spirits industry to promote and protect the premium value of our marvellous wines. Yesterday I was pleased to introduce the Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill to the House. The bill amends the Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Act which was passed in 2006 but never brought into force. It will establish a geographical indications registration regime for wines and spirits similar to the trademark registration regime. It will also amend the Act to ensure that the process for registering geographical indications runs smoothly.Stuart Smith: How will a geographical indications registration regime benefit New Zealand’s wine industry?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Being able to register regional names for our wines and spirits such as Marlborough or Martinborough will reinforce the qualities and reputations of those products. Enabling firms to register geographical indications for wines and spirits will make it easier for our winemakers to enforce their rights in New Zealand. A geographical indications register will also make it easier for our exporters to promote and protect their wines and spirits products internationally. We know New Zealand wines are amongst some of the best in the world and this National Government is committed to guarding and enhancing the reputation of our products and ultimately helping to grow our wine exports.
Young Jonathan: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7693. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Trade: What recent steps has the Government taken to further New Zealand’s trading relationship with Europe?Hon TIM GROSER (Minister of Trade): Last week the Prime Minister together with the European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker and European Council president Donald Tusk agreed to start discussions on a comprehensive free-trade agreement. This is obviously a very significant step forward. It would take no doubt a fair bit of time to bring to completion but it is a huge new and additional opportunity for New Zealand.Jonathan Young: How important as a trading partner is Europe to New Zealand given our position in the Asia-Pacific region?Hon TIM GROSER: In spite of the tremendous success that New Zealand has had over the past 30 to 40 years in diversifying away from one European country Europe collectively still is of vital interest to New Zealand. It is our third-largest export destination in services it is our second-largest and it is our second-largest source and destination of overseas investment. So this will be a very significant step assuming we can bring this to a successful conclusion.Jonathan Young: How does a free-trade agreement with Europe fit with the Government’s wider programme for economic growth?Hon TIM GROSER: Of the six work streams building international connectivity and building export markets it is clearly one of the key elements of the Government’s plan. This is an absolutely vital issue for New Zealand to improve its export performance and opening up opportunities across the board is part of that deal. What this does of course is further diversify our opportunities—or the opportunities of New Zealanders running the businesses that provide income for us—and avoids too much dependence on any one market a lesson we have learnt to our great cost 30 or 40 years ago.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does the Minister honestly believe that New Zealanders will buy this pixie dust of huge benefits in respect of the European Union free-trade deal when between 2014 and 2020 the European Union will spend €408 billion or $672 billion supporting its farmers?Hon TIM GROSER: Considering that the situation is that it is already our third-largest export market any liberalisation will be a darn sight more than just pixie dust.
Hipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7690. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by her reported statement that student achievement would “absolutely” be a factor in a review of the school funding system?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): Yes in the context of the statement in which it was given which was: “We’re very much at the beginning of this process so no decisions at all have been made as to which variables and in what way they’ll be used but will student achievement and learning be one of them? Absolutely.” I emphasise for the member that this is a review and that no decisions have yet been made.Chris Hipkins: Will she rule out imposing financial penalties on schools that do not meet student achievement targets; if not why not?Hon HEKIA PARATA: As I said in my answer to the primary question we are in a review. We are at the very beginning of the process and I am not ruling anything in or out.Chris Hipkins: Why did she categorically rule out considering a greater role for national standards and National Certificate of Educational Achievement data in school funding and teacher-pay decisions in March last year only to then say that those things would absolutely be part of the funding system?Hon HEKIA PARATA: The member is confusing industrial relations with funding for student achievement.Chris Hipkins: When she was asked about the use of national standards data in November last year and said “What we always planned to use it for and what we are now using it for is to help target resources to where they are most needed.” did she mean that the data would be used as a component to determine how much funding schools receive?Hon HEKIA PARATA: What she meant was that we will use it to inform teaching practice in schools and I am pleased to tell you that more and more of that is occurring.Chris Hipkins: Did the tender process for the new $100 million funding system state that the objective was “to manage the investment in the education system by linking enrolment attendance achievement and funding”; if so why?Hon HEKIA PARATA: The member is confusing a review of resourcing—Hon Member: Answer the question.Hon HEKIA PARATA: I am trying to do that. The member is confusing a review of resourcing and an ICT system that is being designed to support the current and future systems.Chris Hipkins: Will she now rule out the linking of student achievement information to school funding decisions; if not why not?Hon HEKIA PARATA: I say again that we are at the beginning of the review process. We are neither ruling in nor ruling out a full discussion about what a new funding systemshould comprise of but that it should focus on how well kids are learning and achieving which is after all the core business of education.Chris Hipkins: So it’s still a no.Hon HEKIA PARATA: It is not a discussion that we are having at the moment.
Vote: Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7633. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A personal vote was called for on the question That the Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 75AdamsDoocey (P)Lee (P)Reti (P)Bakshi (P)DowieLotu-Iiga (P)RossBallDunneMacindoe (P)ScottBarclay (P)English (P)MarkSeymourBarryFinlayson (P)MartinSimpsonBaylyFlavell (P)McClay (P)Smith NBennett DFoss (P)McCully (P)Smith SBennett P (P)Foster-BellMcKelvie (P)StewartBindraGoff (P)Mitchell C (P)TabuteauBishopGoldsmith (P)Mitchell M (P)Tisch (P)BondGoodhew (P)Muller (P)Tolley (P)BorrowsGroser (P)Naylor (P)Upston (P)BridgesGuy (P)Ngaro (P)Wagner (P)Brownlee (P)HudsonO’Connor S (P)Williamson (P)Carter (P)Joyce (P)ParaoneWoodhouse (P)Coleman (P)Kaye (P)Parata (P)Yang (P)Collins (P)Key (P)Parmar (P)Young (P)CurranKorako (P)Peters (P)TellerDean (P)KurigerProsserHayesNoes 45ArdernGenter (P)MoroneySio (P)BrowningGraham (P)Nash (P)Tirikatene (P)ClarkHagueO’Connor DTureiClendonHenare (P)O’RourkeTwyford (P)Cosgrove (P)Hipkins (P)Robertson (P)Wall (P)CunliffeHughesRocheWhaitiriDavidson (P)KingRurawheWilliamsDavis (P)Little (P)SageWoodsDelahunty (P)LogieSalesaDysonMahutaSepuloni (P)FaafoiMallard (P)ShawTellerFoxMathersShearer (P)Lees-GallowayBill read a first time.Bill referred to the Commerce Committee.
Vote: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 03 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7615. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill be now read a second 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 second time.
Vote: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 03 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7614. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the question be agreed to.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.Question agreed to.
Event: Members SwornText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeEvent: Members Sworn[Sitting date: 03 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7551. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Members Sworn12Marama Davidson was presented to the Speaker made the affirmation required by law and took her seat in the House.
Smith Stuart: Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Stuart: Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7632. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura): I would like to start by acknowledging Marama Fox from the Māori Party. Kia ora Marama. That was a very heartfelt and thoughtful speech and I am really pleased that I was here to witness it so thank you for that.I am used to working on Easter Sunday as a grape grower and a winemaker. If we were not out there harvesting grapes or bird scaring and we happened to be finished early I would be down at the Classic Fighters air show in Marlborough which is on every second Easter. In the alternate years it is at Wānaka which has its own version of it—Warbirds over Wānaka. Thousands of people travel to both those places in alternate years to go to those air shows and the number of people who complain because they cannot shop when they are in those areas is phenomenal. The retailers and the people who work in those shops actually want to work. They want to be able to open. They want to be able to provide a service and there are plenty of people there who want to utilise that service.I am somewhat of a lapsed Anglican and I do not have any particular strength in my religious views. I think that we have to acknowledge that in modern New Zealand there are many many religious groups of different faiths with different religious days that they wish to mark. If we go down the path of having no flexibility in this area it would be quite unjust to not recognise those other religious faiths’ particular days.This is a great bill. The bill gives the choice to the local people and I commend it to the House.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Members this debate has concluded. The Speaker has determined that the subject of this vote will be treated as a conscience issue. In this case I know that there are members who want a personal vote and I am prepared to accept one. This is the process that we are going to follow: I am going to put the question and I am going to announce the result. At that stage any member can ask for a personal vote.
Tisch Lindsay: Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7630. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Dr David Clark—5 minutes.