edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Mallard TrevorPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: A petition has been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. CLERK: Petition of Lucy Mclean requesting that the House urge the Government to invest in doubling the number of clinical psychologists being trained for registration.SPEAKER: That petition stands referred to the Petitions Committee. A paper has been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Southern Response annual report for 2021.SPEAKER: That paper is published under the authority of the House. A select committee report has been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Justice Committee on the Harmful Digital Communications (Unauthorised Posting of Intimate Visual Recording) Amendment Bill.SPEAKER: The bill is set down for second reading. The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of bills.CLERK: Civil Aviation Bill introduction Land Transport (Clean Vehicles) Amendment Bill introductionTaxation (Annual Rates for 2021-22 GST and Remedial Matters) Bill introduction.SPEAKER: Those bills are set down for first reading.
Mallard TrevorWEDNESDAY 8 SEPTEMBER 2021The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m. KARAKIA/PRAYERSSPEAKER: Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the Queen and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom justice mercy and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
van Velden BrookeDocument for deletingA document for getting rid of other documents by having its document id replaced with that of the document to be deleted. Then the date role=removed" field takes over to ensure the document is retired.Content:some content"
Thursday 19 May 2022 (continued on Friday 20 May 2022) - Volume 759
Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill — In Committee
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that Nicole McKee's tabled amendment to clause 4 to increase the coronial cap be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 52New Zealand National 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 65New Zealand Labour 65.Amendment not agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that clauses 1 to 4 stand part.Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment.House resumed.
Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 109New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — In Committee
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That Parts 1 and 2 the Schedule and clauses 1 and 2 stand part.Ayes 109New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Parts 1 and 2 the Schedule and clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment.House resumed.CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Mr Speaker the committee has considered the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill and reports progress without amendment. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 109New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 109New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.
Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Commerce (Grocery Sector Covenants) Amendment Bill — Instruction to the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the motion be agreed to.Ayes 65New Zealand Labour 65.Noes 54New Zealand National 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Motion agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Income Insurance Scheme (Enabling Development) Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 67New Zealand Labour 65; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
Income Insurance Scheme (Enabling Development) Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the report be adopted.Ayes 67New Zealand Labour 65; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
Income Insurance Scheme (Enabling Development) Bill — In Committee
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): A party vote was called for on the question that Parts 1 and 2 Schedules 1 to 3 and clauses 1 and 2 stand part.A party vote was called for on the question That Parts 1 and 2 Schedules 1 to 3 and clauses 1 and 2 be agreed to.Ayes 67New Zealand Labour 65; Te Paati Māori 2Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Parts 1 and 2 Schedules 1 to 3 and clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): I will report this bill without amendment.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Income Insurance Scheme (Enabling Development) Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 67New Zealand Labour 65; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.DEPUTY SPEAKER: This bill is set down for committee stage forthwith. I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Income Insurance Scheme (Enabling Development) Bill.
Income Insurance Scheme (Enabling Development) Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Income Insurance Scheme (Enabling Development) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 67New Zealand Labour 65; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.
Income Insurance Scheme (Enabling Development) Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Taxation (Cost of Living Payments) Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 67New Zealand Labour 65; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
Taxation (Cost of Living Payments) Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the report be adopted.Ayes 67New Zealand Labour 65; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42ACT New Zealand 10; New Zealand National 32.Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
Taxation (Cost of Living Payments) Bill — In Committee—Clauses 1 and 2
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes 67New Zealand Labour 65; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Clause 1 agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That clause 2 be agreed to.Ayes 67New Zealand Labour 65; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Abstentions 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Clause 2 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): I will report this bill without amendment.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.
Rurawhe AdrianDEPUTY SPEAKER: Members before we finish can I just acknowledge all members for the work during urgency. In particular can I acknowledge the Opposition whips and the Government whips for keeping the presiding officers informed of progress during urgency and can I thank the Office of the Clerk and the Chamber staff and Hansard. Nō reira kia koutou katoa. Ka nui te mihi atu ki a koutou. Tēnā rā tātou katoa. The House stands adjourned until Tuesday 31 May 2022. The House adjourned at 5.25 p.m. (Friday)
Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
McKee NicoleNICOLE McKEE (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'd like to begin my third reading speech by acknowledging the Minister and the work that he has been doing to ensure that we can actually get this backlog completed or at least processed in a very timely manner. I would have hoped that as my colleagues have suggested we could have been able to make a maximum number rather than a smaller amount to increase the cap or to make it increase with population. That would have been a way that we could futureproof the processes going forward. I do acknowledge that the Minister has said there is a bigger piece of work that is coming in this space. Minister I do hope that you will reach out to the parties across the floor here because you will realise after today's debate that you have our support to make sure that we can process any future legislation to ensure that we can give families some closure as quickly as possible. Because if we are able to support a good initiative we most certainly would like to. At the end of the day it's about our communities it's about our families and when they're grieving for up to four years through an inquest up to eight for some others we need to give them that closure quickly.I don't want to take up too much more time but I'd like to hope that any future legislation is looking at futureproofing. What we will be seeing especially if we have another pandemic or a flu go through—if we have more deaths we don't want to be coming back to this House to have to do this again. Back in my early twenties I worked for the coroner in Rotorua. His name was Roger Brewster and he was with the firm East Brewster where Paul East who was a former member of this Parliament and Roger Brewster worked. Back in that day it was absolutely horrifying to be putting together a lot of the documents that the coroner needed and I know and felt the suffering of so many families as they went through that process. I've been quite passionate about this particular one because to think that some are waiting up to four years to go through that inquest I can just imagine how heart-breaking it is.Minister I commend you for making a start for doing it under urgency and for having four coroners ready to go and work on that backlog. I thank you for that. I just hope that in the future we don't have further delays and perhaps in the next part of your work we can assist you to ensure that that does not occur. We do commend this bill to the House.Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you very much Mr Speaker. Thank you to the Minister Aupito William Sio. Thanks to all who have taken part in what I think's been a really constructive and collegial debate.So far as I'm concerned as National Party's courts spokesperson we'll always be open to supporting measures that are made in good faith and will have a positive effect on the court system including in this case as we've said a step in the right direction—albeit a small one—to reduce the backlog in the coronial system. We've talked about the implications for Kiwis of the current backlog: the emotional financial and social problems caused by those and indeed the distress to those caught up in the system who have lost loved ones suddenly unexpectedly and who deserve answers as soon as reasonably possible.The National Party has made its position tolerably clear" in the delightful phrase of my friend and former colleague the Hon Christopher Finlayson QC. And having made that tolerably clear I repeat only for the sake of the record at this the third reading that we think that increasing the cap is worthwhile. Perhaps removing it altogether would be even more helpful and we support the increasing capacity—not only the appointment of additional coroners but also coronial staff to use that shorthand as implied by the Budget funding announcement of yesterday.This is not the end of the matter in terms of what is needed to improve the coronial system. It is not even necessarily the beginning of the end of the matter. It might be at least however the end of the beginning which is to say it's a good start the National Party supports it and we look forward to further discussions with the current Government and any other players who wish in good faith to improve the lives of Kiwis in this regard. We commend this bill to the House."
Sio Hon Aupito William; Rurawhe AdrianThird ReadingHon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO (Minister for Courts): I move That the Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.I do want to genuinely thank members for the commentary afforded from across the House. As I've said before this bill will increase the maximum number of coroners that can be appointed at any time to 22 fulltime-equivalent coroners. This will enable the implementation of Budget decisions to fund an additional four coroners. An amendment is being made under urgency to enable the recruitment of the coroners to be begin immediately. The new coroners will be appointed by the Governor-General on the advice of the Attorney-General.The coronial system has been under pressure to keep pace with the number of cases being accepted into the jurisdiction and this has meant that whānau and families have had to wait longer to receive the findings from coroners. The additional coroners provided through the Budget and enabled through this bill will support coronial cases to be considered more quickly and will alleviate some of the distress felt by families and whānau who are grieving the loss of a loved one in difficult circumstances but that is only one part of a more comprehensive approach so that the solution is lasting. I commend this bill to the HouseDEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.
Dean JacquiASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Mr Speaker the committee has considered the Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill and reports it without amendment. I move That the report be adopted. Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
Sio Hon Aupito WilliamHon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO (Minister for Courts): I can confirm that currently we have 18 fulltime-equivalent coroners plus seven relief coroners who are not counted as part of the cap. So at the moment Budget funding has only been allowed for the four additional permanent coroners. I suppose that's why but I also want to say that the appointment of more coronial resources is only one component of a broader work programme.With the greatest respect I'd say to the House that we can debate this tool till midnight tonight. The problem is that it's a political solution that often fails to achieve what we're wanting to do. There is a comprehensive piece that's not part of this legislation that we will debate at another time.
McKee NicoleNICOLE McKEE (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. Minister I hear your response in regard to lifting the cap and I just have a few more comments on that. I wonder in a question to you Minister when your advisers have suggested that the number of cases will be under control whether or not there is or will be key performance indicators set to ensure that we do not continue to have a reduction in the number of inquiries and inquests because we have enough coroners to be able to go through that huge case backload. I also wonder Minister why we are unable to lift the cap to 30 so that we are futureproofing the coroner's courts for other Governments so that they do not have to bring urgent bills but rather can get on with business.And a final question for you Minister. In your legislative statement you said that there are seven fulltime-equivalent relief coroners and that they do not count as part of the cap. So I wonder then Minister whether or not you can confirm whether you have apart from the seven that you've already suggested as the coronial registrars more relief coroners on board to help when it has been reported by the Chief Coroner that part of the reason why we have a large backload is because of an unprecedented number of deaths. So if we have a higher population and we have with COVID deaths occurring as well we have an increase in unprecedented numbers—whether or not we would be able to manage that and whether or not we can guarantee that we won't have inquiries and inquests not being held because of that backlog. Thank you.
Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I've got a number of questions some of which I've already flagged at an earlier stage of the afternoon's debate in the spirit of helpfulness. I think I will start by acknowledging the point that the Minister made which is a reasonable one. Of course there is a certain period of time that coronial cases will always be required to take. And of course for that reason we talk about average length of cases and it's not right to highlight individual cases without the context. It's also not appropriate for MPs to talk about how individual cases are tracking to the extent that that might represent an intrusion on the work of the judiciary. So we do talk about averages and what we're interested in is the extent to which the average time to dispose of a case is greater than what would be reasonable given as the Minister says there are not only complexities with the cases themselves but also other Government agencies might conduct investigations and so on.Chlöe Swarbrick has rightly asked what manageable" looks like in terms of the range and that was a question that I would have asked but I would also like to supplement that by asking: at what point does the Minister anticipate that the manageable range will be reached? So a supplementary there effectively to ask not only what but also when. I do want to acknowledge the discussion that's taken place across the House in different approaches to the cap. Whereas I've said that National's approach would be to try and understand if there's any reason that there should be a cap at all the Greens' point was around possible indexation of that and it sounds to me sensible acknowledging Ms Swarbrick's point that it might be a minimum rather than a maximum or a floor rather than a ceiling that is appropriate. And as the ACT member Nicole McKee has said in relation to the amendment in her name there is the possibility of increasing beyond the increase that the Minister is already making National is open to all of those and indeed actively supportive in the case of at least what Ms McKee has put on the Table.Finally my questions are around the analysis that's been made. To some extent the Minister has answered that. I do acknowledge at the start of the committee stage he talked about that manageable range and effectively then it all does come down to the approach to reduce the backlog whether that is an aggressive one to try and bring that down as soon as possible or really over a long period of time which seems to me the approach if we're only increasing the cap by two. So I'll put those questions to the Minister and look forward to those and no doubt the rest of the committee does as well."
Sio Hon Aupito WilliamClauses 1 to 4Hon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO (Minister for Courts): I thank my colleagues on the other side for raising that so that we can dispense with the bill as quickly as possible while also maintaining the ability to be able to respond to our colleagues' questions.Clause 1 is really simple—it's the title clause. The title of the bill is the Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill. The title reflects the purpose of the bill to raise the statutory cap on the maximum number of coroners.Clause 2 is the commencement clause. The amendment Act will come into force on the day after the date of Royal assent. This will enable the recruitment of additional coroners to commence as soon as possible. Clause 3 notes that the principal Act to be amended is the Coroners Act.Clause 4 is the substantial clause here and that contains the only substantive amendment in this bill. Clause 4(1) amends section 109(1) of the Coroners Act 2006 to increase the maximum number of coroners that can be appointed at any time from 20 fulltime-equivalent coroners to 22 fulltime-equivalent coroners. Clause 4(2) makes a consequential amendment to section 109(2)(e) of the Coroners Act 2006 to change the example that illustrates how full-time equivalents are calculated. The number given in the example has been increased from 13.5 to 21.5 to reflect the new maximum number of coroners.Just before I sit down I do want to say with the greatest respect to the ACT Party that I'm not accepting the Supplementary Order Paper as provided. I've been advised that the Ministry of Justice modelling from November 2021 shows that the appointment of the additional four coroners should bring caseloads to within a manageable range. The ministry's modelling works on the basis that 3000 active cases represents a sustainable caseload for the coronial jurisdiction and this is based on historical data when the coroner was closing the same number of coronial cases as were entering the coronial jurisdiction each month. The number of active cases will never decrease to zero because there is a minimum length of time a case will take to resolve regardless of the amount of coroner resource. The appointment of more coronial resource is only one component of a broader work programme to reduce the coronial caseload and maintain it at a sustainable level.I've heard members of the House raise issues about moving these things with urgency. I acknowledge that and it's why this bill is specifically about these case numbers. But coronial inquiries by their nature can take time. For example a coroner may put the inquiry on hold pending the outcome of another agencies' investigation—for example by the Police or Health. That is another piece of work that is not being debated here in this case.
Dean Jacqui; Penk ChrisIn CommitteeCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members the House is in committee on the Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill. I won't bother going through some of the reminders. You've heard them many times. So members we come now to clause 1 and the question is that clause 1 stand part.CHRIS PENK (Senior Whip—National): Point of order. I seek leave of the committee that all provisions within the bill be taken as one debate.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.
Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
Sio Hon Aupito WilliamSecond Reading Hon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO (Minister for Courts): I move That the Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Let me just find my speech. Can I just firstly acknowledge the commentary that I've heard from across the House and concur with the issues that have been raised. But I do want the House to note that as I said earlier this bill for the reasons that have been mentioned about the concerns of urgency is very much targeted towards amending the Coroners Act 2006 to simply increase the maximum number of coroners that can be appointed any time from 20 fulltime-equivalent coroners to 22 fulltime-equivalent coroners.The last speaker Harete Hipango made mention that yes we did increase it in 2019 but no one took into consideration that people move on people would get sick people would retire. Therefore the temporary relief coroners were to try and help resolve that. However it doesn't take away the fact that we do need to address this. This is the first phase. This bill is being passed under urgency because Budget decisions to appoint four additional coroners cannot be fully implemented until this bill has been enacted.So I say again the recruitment of the additional coroners will commence immediately after enactment. The new coroners will be appointed by the Governor-General on the advice of the Attorney-General. The additional permanent coroners will relieve some of the pressure currently sitting with existing 18 fulltime-equivalent coroners. But sharing the workload will enable faster resolution of coronial cases and together with other changes under way within the coronial system this should reduce the length of time our bereaved families and whānau are waiting for coronial findings. This will help alleviate some of the considerable stress of families and whānau going through the system. I therefore commend this bill to the House.
Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Henderson EmilyDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei) (remote): Kia ora e te Māngai o te Whare. As a member of the Justice Committee dealing with the petition of Corinda Taylor I'm pleased to be able to support the first reading of the Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill.It will be a bill that will bring relief to whānau already sorely burdened by the grief of a loss of a loved one and who have been further burdened by the longstanding delays in the coronial process. The Government has listened and this year's Budget will enable the appointment of four additional permanent coroners taking the total from the current 18 to 22 alongside our seven full-time relief coroners.It's a hugely important appropriation for this court; but to realise it the first step is to amend the Coroners Act 2006 to raise the cap on further coroner appointments to 22. As a purely technical amendment it's appropriate for urgency but most of all urgency is appropriate so we can bring the Budget decisions to fruition and reduce the waiting times and the distress to grieving families and whānau as quickly as we possibly can. I commend this bill to the House.
McKee NicoleNICOLE McKEE (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise to speak on behalf of ACT for the Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill in this the first reading. I do acknowledge the Minister and the fact that we actually have something in place at the moment or now to be able to get through some of the backlog in the Coroners Court. The intent of course is to lift the cap from 20 to 22 fulltime-equivalents (FTEs) and I do note in the disclosure statement that there's no inquiries no reviews no evaluations no reports but there was actually a briefing from the Chief Coroner. And as my colleague across the House has already mentioned the copies that have been received are redacted.And in order for all of us to be able to assist our communities it would be really great if we could understand the full issues so that we can support whomever is in Government to make sure that we have communities who can move past their grief and move on. So it is under urgency that it's being held now but the urgency has actually been going on for quite a number of years. And when we have a cap at 20 we want to lift it to 22 and we only have 18 coroners then we need to do more in our humble opinion. The seven coronial registrars and the four clinical advisors is a great result because by lifting the cap and getting more coroners they are going to need more support. So I appreciate that the Government has looked to that as well.But the reality is that we are expected to have a blowout in coronial cases—an expected 400 extra cases over the next three years. We have these delays but by increasing to 22 we're barely keeping our heads above the water especially as the population continues to increase. ACT says the Government needs to do more. We need to fix this issue so that we can support families in their time of grief. And while this is under urgency it almost feels like a bit of tokenism especially when we know there are so many more needed. So the cap being set at 20 was set at a time when our population was 4.2 million and now that our populations is sitting at 5.1 million that would actually equate to 24.4 FTEs being required just to keep up with the population. And this bill is increasing our cap to 22.I have tabled an amendment in the House where we would like to increase the cap to 30. We believe that this will allow the clearance of the backlog that is in place at the moment. It will help to give families closure and it will mean that the Minister will not have to come back at Budget time 2023 to put through another urgent request. We're hoping come that time the Government is actually giving more money to be able to progress the coronial matters that we're hearing. Thank you Mr Speaker. We support the bill.
Walters VanushiVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Mr Speaker. This is a bill that makes a very small legislative change but it will have a big practical effect for many New Zealanders. I think a lot of people assume that the coroners don't get referred many cases but in fact they have a very broad mandate. What we know is that about 3500 cases are referred to the coroner every year. What we also know is that we've seen an increase in the time taken to process those cases and we know that despite extra part-time coroners being appointed in 2019 those longer processing times continue to occur. Those of us who sit on the Justice Committee know that in particular because we heard from a petitioner about this very issue. Corinda Taylor submitted to us on this particular issue so it is wonderful to see that this is being addressed with urgency today that allows these changes to be made in sync with the Budget commitments. I commend this bill to the House.
Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you Mr Speaker. I acknowledge the enthusiasm of my worthy colleague from the ACT Party Nicole McKee and I'm sure she will get her chance before too long. I do want to acknowledge the Minister Aupito William Sio—the Minister in charge of this bill the Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill. And National of course is supporting this legislation. We do want to see progress made on what is a significant blight I think in the justice area where New Zealanders have been kept for far too long to get the results out of the coronial system when their loved one has died. The process is far too slow—the system has been too slow for a long time but has got substantially worse over the last few years and even worse again over COVID. So we support both the investment in the Budget and secondly this legislation to lift the cap on the number of coroners. Obviously we don't particularly like urgent legislation such as this and we would have preferred they could have done it in a normal pattern but given the relatively straightforward nature of the issue that's something we can support. What we worry about of course is not so much—this Government has demonstrated its ability to announce stuff and spend stuff. What's not quite so clear is the ability to have the actual improvement in delivery of time frames within this part of what the Government does and so we'd be very keen to see some very clear plans about how this will actually improve things on the ground.The other point we'd make of course is there are much wider issues around access to justice in the court system which I would hope the Minister has been very focused on over the last little while. So we've seen the time taken between cases being taken in the criminal courts and also the civil courts hugely extended over the last four years since this Government has been in place. It's a longstanding problem but it's been getting worse; likewise in areas like the Employment Relations Authority—huge delays. In all these areas people's lives have been put on hold for far too long. When we look at the justice sector in the broadest sense the issues that confront you are first the rise in violent crime; second the rise in gangs and youth crime being out of control or of great concern. But the second broader issue is this whole issue of how can we get the court system working much more efficiently and effectively so that New Zealanders can get access to justice but also access to speedy justice so that they can get on with their lives after a criminal case both in terms of victims and their perpetrators. But also in the civil court so people can get on with their business lives as well. So I just encourage the Government to show equal enthusiasm in that space as well. Mr Speaker thank you very much.
Andersen GinnyGINNY ANDERSEN (Labour—Hutt South): Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. Thank you very much Mr Speaker. Look it's great to see that Budget 2022 delivers a package of investment to improve the coronial system and reduce delays particularly for those families who are grieving. The operating funding of $28.5 million over four years and $1.6 million of capital funding aims to ensure that families and whānau receive coroner's findings sooner than they have been and also to reduce the coronial caseload.It's really heartening to hear that as a Budget piece of legislation the Opposition are voting in favour of this—it's good to see that indeed. This is a good bill. We know for a fact that the coronial process by its very nature can take time. It is designed to find out the facts about a particular death provide resolution for families and also to produce findings that may help potentially prevent future deaths and to learn from what has happened in the past.The additional coroners provided through the Budget and enabled through this bill will support the coronial cases to be considered far more quickly. These additional coroners will enable faster resolution of coronial cases—that way giving families relief and a sense of closure as well.This is a bill that I think will be welcomed by many New Zealanders. I commend it to the House.
Reti ShaneDr SHANE RETI (National): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. Look thank you National will be supporting this bill through its progress here at the third reading and while this is a customs and excise bill I just want to focus for a moment that the end outcome we're looking for is actually a human outcome to have a deterrence to reduce smoking. That's the end outcome we want to reach. And while this all about the excise and the customs part to that I want to bear that in mind. To take that a step further looking at the regulatory impact statement they make notes that when they've been out to stakeholders they're unable to determine the material implications for Māori children seniors disabled people women gender diverse Pacific peoples veterans and rural communities but they don't believe it's significant. I was looking at some data from Australia and certainly the use of tobacco water pipes is quite small and infrequent—well less than 1 percent as I recall. There is also commentary as I mentioned in my first reading speech that I saw mostly through the Middle East and that some of the Middle Eastern communities here in New Zealand may be affected by this. The reflection from officials is that this is a niche product and one which is unlikely to have a large impact on that community. So I'm reassured by that. I just want to briefly come to and conclude on the health impact because for a while there was some thinking that tobacco water-pipe smoking might be safer because as the tobacco comes through the water it's almost been purified or reduced in some way. That's actually not correct. It turns out that a number of studies have shown that for people who use water-pipe tobacco frequently they have levels of nicotine in their urine generally equivalent to smoking 10 cigarettes a day and that every one session of using water-pipe tobacco is equivalent to actually smoking two cigarettes. So I just wanted to bring the discussion back to the purpose: we're actually doing this so we can offer some protection for people who might be bound by tobacco and offer some hope and a sense that we can help them change this behaviour. We commend this bill to the House.
Whaitiri MekaThird ReadingHon MEKA WHAITIRI (Minister of Customs): I am pleased to come to the third reading of the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products)—DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Minister needs to move the motion.Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: Sorry Mr Speaker; my bad. I move That the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. As I said I am pleased to come to the third reading of the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill. As I've said before this short bill will both protect Crown revenue and help protect New Zealanders' health. I am therefore both happy and relieved to see it come to its final reading. The bill is a straightforward and pragmatic response to suspected non-compliance and a technical change in an international tool of trade. Both affect tobacco and this bill therefore helps protect the nation's health and the Crown revenue needed to fund Government services.As a final re-cap the bill achieves these objectives in the following ways. It sets a new rate for water-pipe tobacco based on the total weight of the tobacco. This will overcome the current problem where some importers are thought to be under-declaring the tobacco content of their water-pipe tobacco in order to pay less duty. I can't tell you the extent of this practice as it is not technically feasible for Customs to verify the tobacco content of water-pipe tobacco. That has enforcement implications. This bill will fix the situation by charging excise on water-pipe tobacco at $234.77 per kilogram of total weight. For good measure the bill will also prohibit the importation of water-pipe tobacco without a permit. This will help Customs monitor imports and discourage any other forms of non-compliance. This regime already applies to most other tobacco.The international Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System which provides numerical descriptors for all types of goods is periodically reviewed. In the last review a new tariff and excise heading was created for some tobacco products. This has changed some of the descriptors cited in the Customs and Excise Act 2018. This bill updates those so that all tobacco excise will continue to be adjusted annually to reflect inflation. Throughout the passage of this bill I have talked about possible non-compliance. Some importers are under-declaring the tobacco content of water-pipe tobacco so as to pay less duty than they should. When some practices are identified it is appropriate for me to take action to protect the fairness and integrity of the tax system by taking legislation such as this through the House. But non-compliance is the exception. I want to take this opportunity to publicly recognise that the overwhelming majority of traders are law abiding. I am proud that by closing off avenues for non-compliance tax evasion I and this bill are giving honest traders a level playing field. I therefore commend this bill at its final reading to the House.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.
Swarbrick Chlöe; Whaitiri MekaCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central): Following up on that line of questioning I totally take on board the Minister's point with regard to extra resourcing particularly for clamping down on the black market in tobacco. That is of course I think the key point of interest or curiosity particularly for the Greens when we're looking at harm reduction for all substances.How do we regulate a substance knowing that a substance can be harmful in order to reduce that harm noting that even with the imposition of prohibition or taxes to the point of practical prohibition that we're not going to necessarily eliminate this thing? In fact there's the potential for perverse outcomes where we might see people cooking things up in their kitchens and distributing them on the streets which then means that these things are unregulated and in turn that there might more harm produced.Just again alluding to that point that the Minister made about how we get that balance right and obviously our international cooperation too and that extra resourcing to the tune of—I believe off the top of my head if I'm correct from my recollection of Budget documents—around $10 million for clamping down on black market tobacco. What kind of consideration has the Government given to whether there is a chance to perhaps err into the space of chasing one's tail where you're throwing good money after bad without potentially getting that balance right on what the level of effective tax rate is for the likes of tobacco noting that there is now needing to obviously be more money put into policing the black market; is there potential that we end up getting into a situation like I might say with cannabis?Hon MEKA WHAITIRI (Minister of Customs): I want to thank the member for the questions. This isn't about eluding the questions she's asking but we are trying to debate this bill and I think I've attempted to address what Customs is doing with this bill. I've declared the 15 percent that we are targeting and also why we're doing it under urgency. I feel I've answered the questions and if members want to ask something specifically about the bill then I'm more than happy to answer that here this afternoon.CHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central): A specific question then if I may. What impacts if any does the Minister think that this would have on the potential for the increased black market for water-based tobacco?Hon MEKA WHAITIRI (Minister of Customs): I think it's going to have a significant impact both with the changes to the legislation the Act that governs it but also like I said the $10.4 million that's invested by the Government in Budget 2022.
McAnulty Kieran; McKelvie IanKIERAN McANULTY (Labour—Wairarapa): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question.CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Leave has been requested for that. Is there any objection? There's none. The question is that Parts 1 and 2 Schedule and clauses 1 and 2 stand part.
McKelvie IanIn CommitteeCHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Members the House is in committee on the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill. I remind members they are able to participate remotely. If you're on Zoom and want to take a call please type Call" in the chat. You should also use the chat if you wish to raise a point of order. We've received new tabled amendments. I will advise members so they can refresh the House papers page to see the new amendment. Finally it would be helpful for members to ask multiple questions if they have them of the member in charge during their call. Members we now come to Part 1."
McDowall JamesDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you. I just want to make a few comments; they'll be short comments. It was interesting there the Minister addressing one of the points I made about why this was urgent and the answer was Well it's about revenue." I thought that was a bit ironic. I thought these sorts of things were supposed to be about health. But in any case in terms of revenue capture in terms of you know actually getting duties off these sorts of things—look this is the problem of these sorts of regulations right? You create a prohibition or a duty and then suddenly it all goes underground and you can't actually tax it properly anyway and then it just joins the black market with everything else coming in. So there are certainly lots of questions to be had here and I just want to reaffirm our opposition to this whole process. Thank you Mr Speaker."
Reti Shane; McKelvie IanDr SHANE RETI (National): Thank you Mr Speaker. I do agree with other members that it's hard to imagine that this is urgent in Budget urgency. There is some urgency I accept that. And that urgency is shown in the regulatory impact statement by the substantial increase in capture at the Customs border. In the one year from 29 June 2019 to 29 June 2020 Customs seized a total of 32 grams of molasses; the following year it had gone up to 430 kilograms. Wow! That's a substantial increase. The number of seizures had also increased substantially. That June to June 2019 to 2020 had one seizure but the following year 2020 to 2021 it had gone up to 57 I think I did see. So there's no doubt that avoidance is increasing and so that does lend some urgency. It's also a substantial volume of material we're talking about. This is not trivial: 14000 kilos suspected undeclared imports. That's just the undeclared imports so quite a large quantity. So there is a need to be doing this there is a timeliness. I don't think it's under Budget urgency but this is where we find ourselves. And as I said National will be supporting this bill. Thank you Mr Speaker.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): The question is that the motion be agreed to.
Whaitiri MekaSecond Reading Hon MEKA WHAITIRI (Minister of Customs): I move That the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. The bill will combat the suspected underpayment of excise-equivalent duty on water-pipe tobacco and make a technical amendment to the Customs and Excise Act 2018 so that all tobacco excise continues to be annually adjusted for inflation. This is a short bill barely more than a page but it is important and it is urgent. The bill directly supports both the Government's aim to reduce the harm from smoking and protect an important source of Government revenue. It will help New Zealand achieve its Smokefree Aotearoa 2025 Action Plan because yes even with a water pipe users still inhale tobacco smoke and we all know the personal tragedies that can result and the impact on our health system. The bill will help Customs better oversee the importation of water-pipe tobacco and ensure that the correct amount of excise is paid. It does this by creating a new statistical unit based on the total weight of water-pipe tobacco; secondly setting a new excise and excise-equivalent rate based on the current tobacco excise rate and tobacco content of 15 percent; and thirdly making water-pipe tobacco a prohibited import without a permit. The bill will also protect excise revenue by ensuring that the correct rate of excise-equivalent duty continues to be paid on all tobacco into the future. The Customs and Excise Act 2018 provides that tobacco excise is annually adjusted for inflation. The provisions doing this refer to tobacco types by using international numerical descriptors. However the latest international revision of those descriptors has created a new tariff heading. The Customs and Excise Act 2018 consequently needs updating. Without this update the annual inflation adjustment would not apply to all those types of tobacco that it should. You may ask why this bill needs to be passed with the urgency of Budget night legislation—from my colleagues in the ACT Party. Well it is urgent because there is revenue at stake: (1) if announcements were made about proposed changes to the requirements for water-pipe tobacco such is that which comes with a public consultation process this would enable unscrupulous importers to import greater amounts and stockpile it to reduce the excise-equivalent duty they would pay; (2) the technical amendment updating the numerical descriptors needs to be in effect by 1 January 2023 when the next inflation adjustment will occur. Otherwise we will have some tobacco not subject to the same excise and excise-equivalent rates as the rest. This has the potential to create an uneven playing field and will undermine the Smokefree Aotearoa 2025 Action Plan. I commend this bill to the House.
Mooney JosephJOSEPH MOONEY (National—Southland): I take a brief call on the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill. I have only one chance in my life to do so so I'll take that opportunity this afternoon. This bill is designed to combat suspected under-declaration of tobacco content by importers of water-pipe tobacco and to secure Crown revenue from taxes on the same. It imposes import controls changes the statistical unit for calculating duty and creates a new excise and excise-equivalent duty rate for water-pipe tobacco which is also known as flavoured tobacco hookah shisha molasses tobacco and fruit tobacco. The National Party will be supporting this bill as it is a relatively straightforward and simple solution to a problem that has been identified. With that I will end my words this afternoon.