edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Williams Poto: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Poto: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1070. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East)to the Member in charge of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill: Does she intend to continue with the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill; if so why?SUE MORONEY (Member in charge of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill):I will continue with the bill because extending paid parental leave to 26 weeks is affordable it is a wise investment in New Zealand’s future it will support bonding and attachment between parent and baby in those crucial early months and it was supported by 99.6 percent of the 3800 submitters to the bill.Poto Williams: Does she propose any amendments to the bill?SUE MORONEY: Because the Government proclaimed that its only opposition to my bill was the cost which the finance Minister claimed was $500 million I recently proposed an amendment that reduced the cost to just $6 million in the next financial year. My amendment proposed that 26 weeks’ paid parental leave be extended to the families of twins or triplets of babies born prematurely or of babies born with a disability.
Roche Denise: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoche Denise: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1070. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.DENISE ROCHE (Green)to the Member in charge of the Education (Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools) Amendment Bill: What recent evidence if any has she received that supports her bill?METIRIA TUREI (Member in charge of the Education (Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools) Amendment Bill):Low-decile schools report feeding lunch to up to 40 to 50 children a day in their schools. Other evidence suggests that 15 percent of children in low-decile schools are there without lunch. There is clear evidence that a lunch programme is also required in low-decile schools alongside the breakfast programmes that exist so that children have more than just two meals a day.Denise Roche: What evidence is there that a lunch programme in addition to breakfast is needed in low-decile schools?METIRIA TUREI: Hungry children cannot learn. Although the breakfast programmes provide a meal for some children in some schools it is important that all children have access to a nutritious and healthy lunch so they are able to maximise the education they are receiving. We all agree that children having the best possible education is the highest priority. Making sure hungry kids have enough food so they can learn well is the responsibility of us all.
Roche Denise: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoche Denise: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1070. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]2.DENISE ROCHE (Green)to the Member in charge of the Education (Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools) Amendment Bill: What select committee has she nominated for the Education (Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools) Amendment Bill?METIRIA TUREI (Member in charge of the Education (Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools) Amendment Bill):In his first reading speech Hone Harawira nominated the Māori Affairs Committee to receive this bill should it pass its first reading. Although the bill amends the Education Act the Māori Affairs Committee has dealt quite recently with issues of poverty and poverty mitigation through its inquiry into the well-being of tamariki Māori. I have great confidence that the Māori Affairs Committee can deal with this bill very well.Denise Roche: Why has she nominated the Māori Affairs Committee to hear submissions on the Education (Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools) Amendment Bill?METIRIA TUREI: I support the Māori Affairs Committee hearing the evidence on this bill given that Māori are the majority ethnic group at low-decile schools. The recent Child Poverty Monitor showed that one in three Māori children is suffering from poverty. I want Māori whānau and communities to have a high level of comfort in making submissions to the select committee. I understand that Māori whānau will have a much greater level of comfort if that is done at the Māori Affairs Committee.
Sage Eugenie: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSage Eugenie: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1069. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.EUGENIE SAGE (Green)to the Member in charge of the Register of Pecuniary Interests of Judges Bill: Is it necessary for New Zealand to legislate for the adoption of a Register of Pecuniary Interests for the judiciary; if so why?Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Member in charge of the Register of Pecuniary Interests of Judges Bill):Requiring judges to make returns of pecuniary interests through legislation is desirable as it provides for greater transparency within the judicial system and avoids any conflict of interest in the judicial role. The purpose of such a bill is to require judges to make such returns to provide that transparency and avoid any such conflict of interests in the judicial role. The bill emulates models in other jurisdictions such as the United States and has attracted interest elsewhere such as Scotland.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In that question to a member what was procedural about that question that made the Office of the Clerk accept it?Mr SPEAKER: The Clerk has advised that it is not just a matter of procedure; it is about the nature of the business for which the member has charge. I will certainly be listening very carefully to any supplementary questions that apply to any of these members’ questions. But the question was accepted it is in order and now we will proceed with the supplementary question.Eugenie Sage: Will the bill affect judicial independence in any way?Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM: No. The bill does not imply any right of the legislature to intervene in the affairs of the judiciary. Nothing in the bill would compromise the constitutional principle of judicial independence. The intention is simply to promote due administration of justice by requiring a similar financial return by judges to what is already required by both the legislature and the executive of this country.
Smith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1069. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura)to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent reports has he received on the number of Honorary Fishery Officers leading into the summer fishing period?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries):Honorary fisheries officers are volunteers who are warranted by the Ministry for Primary Industries. They have powers to monitor our amateur fishers including seizing illegally taken seafood and equipment. I have recently been advised that the number of warranted honorary fisheries officers will increase to 225 as the Ministry for Primary Industries undergoes a new recruitment before the busy summer period. These will help bolster our resources to protect our fisheries and help educate all New Zealanders who continue to enjoy them.Stuart Smith: What role do honorary fisheries officers play in the management of our fisheries?Hon NATHAN GUY: New Zealand’s coastline is very long and remote in places so the role these volunteers play by monitoring catch and educating fishers and the public is absolutely critical. Honorary fisheries officers account for around 75 percent—or over 17000—of interactions with recreational fishers a year. These are knowledgable professional volunteers who give up hours of their time and I want to take a moment to thank them for what they do.
Mathers Mojo: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMathers Mojo: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1068. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.MOJO MATHERS (Green)to the Minister of Broadcasting: Will she consider using regulation to increase New Zealand’s level of captioning for free-to-air television given that all of Europe has regulations in place for captioning; if not why not?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister of Broadcasting):Not at this time because I am satisfied that there has been a significant increase in New Zealand’s level of free-to-air TV captioning over the past decade including 100 percent of prime-time content on Television One and TV2 now being captioned.Mojo Mathers: Is she aware that New Zealand has ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which affirms the right to access information and popular culture; if so will she commit to captioning all free-to-air television?Hon AMY ADAMS: In answer to the first part of the question yes.Mojo Mathers: Does she consider that without regulation New Zealand will not be able to receive the high levels of captioning comparable with Australia the UK and the US given that high rates of captioning have been achieved only in countries that have rules requiring broadcasters to provide captioning?Hon AMY ADAMS: Well what I do consider is that without regulation over the past decade New Zealand has moved from having around only 70 hours a week of captioning and absolutely no provision of audio description to now having more than 250 hours a week of free-to-air captioning plus having 17 Sky channels carrying some captioning and around 20 hours of audio description per week. All of that has been achieved without regulation. The trend is for that to continue to increase and we support that.Mojo Mathers: Does she consider it acceptable that New Zealand On Air - funded programmes can be either shown without captions or released as DVDs without captions and will she consider bringing in a requirement for all New Zealand On Air - funded programmes to be available in captions and audio description; if not why not?Hon AMY ADAMS: That is something I am considering.
Scott Alastair: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeScott Alastair: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1066. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa)to the Minister of Revenue: What information has he received about the Government’s action against tax fraud?Hon TODD McCLAY (Minister of Revenue):As part of the Government’s crackdown on tax compliance the Inland Revenue Department has identified fraud-related discrepancies totalling $10.4 million in 2014 which is more than double the $4.5 million identified in 2013. This is a return on an investment of $3.73 for every dollar spent. It is important to note that the vast majority of New Zealanders voluntarily and responsibly pay their fair share of tax. However this Government is determined to catch up with those who do not by going after debt outstanding returns hidden economy activities aggressive tax planning fraud and property compliance.Alastair Scott: What other initiatives has the Government implemented relating to tax compliance?Hon TODD McCLAY: As part of Budget 2014 the Government provided an extra $132 million to the Inland Revenue Department to bolster tax compliance activities. This is on top of nearly $200 million already allocated through Budgets 2010 and 2012 for tax compliance and debt collection work. The results of this investment can clearly be seen: $49.8 million additional revenue has been collected through hidden economy tax avoidance initiatives non-compliance through tax property speculation identified $52.4 million and in going after aggressive tax planning we identified $539 million of discrepancies—a whopping return of $62.40 for every $1 spent. Every dollar we recover means that there is more that we can invest in funding health education and other essentials for the good of society.
Woods Megan: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWoods Megan: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1064. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram)to the Prime Minister: Did Jason Ede provide “Mr Slater with draft blog posts” regarding NZSIS information?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):I am aware that Jason Ede spoke to Cameron Slater just as he did with journalists and other bloggers. I have no knowledge other than what was written in the report of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security which was that he provided draft blog posts regarding NZSIS information.Dr Megan Woods: Does he then accept that his office has a proactive relationship with Cameron Slater?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No and I would point out that Mr Ede has not actually worked for me in my capacity as Prime Minister for over 3 years.Dr Megan Woods: Has he discussed with either his current chief of staff or his former deputy chief of staff Mr de Joux that Mr de Joux was not happy that Mr Ede has chosen to work through Mr Slater rather than the mainstream media as per paragraph 214 of the Gwyn report?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In answer to the last part of the question I have not had any discussions with Phil de Joux about that matter.Dr Megan Woods: Has he or his chiefs of staff asked Jason Ede for copies of the blog post that Cheryl Gwyn states Jason Ede drafted for Cameron Slater; if not why not?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In answer to the first part of the question no I do not believe they have.Dr Megan Woods: Why has he not asked for the draft of the blog posts?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Well I do not think it would achieve a hell of a lot any more than if Mr Little was to go and ask how many people write anonymously or under pseudonyms on The Standard and all of those things. He might find some really amazing answers but that again would be the pot calling the kettle black would it not?
Mitchell Mark: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1063. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney)to the Minister of Trade: What progress has the Government made in opening up overseas markets for New Zealand exporters?Hon TIM GROSER (Minister of Trade):Monday marked the first anniversary of the coming into force of the New Zealand - Chinese Taipei economic cooperation agreement and I am very pleased to say to the House that our exports in the 9 months—we do not have the 12 month figures; we do not have the last quarter—have increased by 20 percent. With reference to the completely misleading comments in the previous question that can be compared with a total increase in New Zealand exports to September 2014 of 8.6 percent—Grant Robertson: As a percentage of GDP Tim?Hon TIM GROSER: Not Mr Robertson flat-lining at all.Grant Robertson: I seek leave of the House to table figures compiled by the Parliamentary Library that show a flat-lining of exports as a percentage of GDP.Mr SPEAKER: Order! On the basis that it may not be available and it may be informative I will put the leave and the House will determine. Leave is sought to table that particular research from the Parliamentary Library. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Mark Mitchell: Who benefits the most from this agreement?Hon TIM GROSER: Well first of all there are only 9 months’ data but there have been a number of companies and a number of New Zealanders who have benefited. There have been some spectacular increases in our exports. Our apple export increases have been 210 percent and one particular Hawke’s Bay company which produces Rockit apples—little tiny apples in a very interesting box—has had a 700 percent increase in that period. Dairy exports have increased by nearly 40 percent. But it is not just one-way traffic. Bicycle imports from Taiwan have increased by 27 percent. You would have thought that that would please even the Green Party but before the Green Party will support any trade agreement it will be a cold day in hell.Mark Mitchell: What other trade agreements is the Government pursuing to help Kiwi exporters?Hon TIM GROSER: We are making very good progress. It has been a very difficult negotiation but as members will be aware we have finally crossed the line politically with Korea. We have now got a series of steps to get that ratified and put in place. This will be a big deal for New Zealand and we are making excellent progress with the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Gulf States.
Young Jonathan: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1061. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth)to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What update can he give on energy resources development in the Taranaki region?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources):Yesterday I welcomed the announcement by OMV that a new oil well has gone into production in the Maari field in Taranaki and is expected to produce around 4500 barrels a day. OMV and its partners are investing more than $400 million in the five-well redevelopment Maari growth campaign. This project is estimated to help lift field production overall and extend the life of the field out to past 2023. It is great news for the industry the Taranaki region and all New Zealanders who benefit from the taxes and the royalties that this company will deliver.Jonathan Young: What are some of the benefits from resources production in Taranaki and across New Zealand?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: If we take OMV as a good example since 2009 it has paid more than $850 million in royalties and taxes with half of that alone coming from the Maari field. In total the Government receives around $800 million in taxes and royalties from companies operating here each year which helps pay for the schools the hospitals the roads and other essential infrastructure. Also the resources sector is an important employer in New Zealand. Over the past 10 years employment has more than doubled with workers typically earning more than twice the average New Zealand salary. The Government’s hard work through the block offer process and robust regulatory reform have delivered significant levels of activity and we are committed to continuing to develop our resource potential in a safe and environmentally responsible way.
Speaker’s Rulings — Debate—Reading of SpeechesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSpeaker’s Rulings — Debate—Reading of Speeches[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1085. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Speaker’s RulingsDebate—Reading of SpeechesMr SPEAKER: Before I call the next order of business I just want members particularly those more recently elected members to refer to Speaker’s ruling 47/1: “Where possible members should not read speeches… However no member other than the Speaker may interrupt a member who is speaking to suggest a breach of this convention and the Speaker may allow speeches to be read in some circumstances. Such circumstances may relate to the technical nature of the material under discussion or the relative experience of the member concerned.” I send a message particularly to newer members. Have your notes at all times if they help you but you will make a substantially better contribution particularly to a debate like a general debate if you can refrain from actually reading your speeches.
Vote: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:916. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes107New Zealand National 60; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes14Green Party 14.Bill read a second time.
Vote: Parole Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parole Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:887. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the Parole Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes105New Zealand National 60; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes16Green Party 14; Māori Party 2.Bill read a second time.
Vote: Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Bill Parole (Extended Supervision Orders) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Bill Parole (Extended Supervision Orders) Amendment Bill — Second Readings[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:876. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Bill be now read a second time.Ayes107New Zealand National 60; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes14Green Party 14.Bill read a second time.Parole (Extended Supervision Orders) Amendment Bill read a second time.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:859. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a second time.Ayes62New Zealand National 60; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes59New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2.Bill read a second time.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:859. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the question be agreed to.Ayes62New Zealand National 60; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes59New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2.Question agreed to.
Foster-Bell Paul: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:915. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National):It is a pleasure to take a brief call on the second reading of the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill. May I congratulate the previous speaker Stuart Nash on the very sensible and balanced approach he has taken and thank the Opposition for backing what is in my view a very balanced bill. It balances the need of exporters to be able to provide assurance to those valuable markets where we are sending our commodities that they are prepared and produced in an ethical manner without the unnecessary suffering of animals and it does move our country in the right direction in terms of providing the highest possible ethical standards. Animals are our valuable little cuddly friends—our pets—they are our delicious lunch or dinner and they are a valuable commodity to be sold overseas. This bill makes sense in all of these areas and for that reason I have great pleasure in commending it to the House.
Kuriger Barbara: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKuriger Barbara: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:913. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country):As a member of the agribusiness community and a new member of the Primary Production Committee I would like to acknowledge the work that has gone on.The Animal Welfare Amendment Bill is an important piece of legislation that will enable New Zealand to build a more productive economy by updating and strengthening animal welfare in New Zealand. This bill will make legislation easier to enforce and will give wider powers to those charged with dealing with people who breach welfare laws.The Animal Welfare Act 1999 sets out the correct underlying principles. However these amendments indicate that it is time to update and improve legislation surrounding animal welfare. Both for New Zealanders and for our international trading reputation it is important that the way we treat animals is correct and this bill aims to improve New Zealand’s reputation in this sector. We have one of the best animal welfare systems in the world but at the same time we are always looking for improvements. Ultimately the vast majority of New Zealanders already take great care of their animals and will hardly notice the changes made in this bill. However there will be greater sanctions for those few who do mistreat animals. Thank you.
Mallard Trevor: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:911. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I call Kevin Hague for a 5-minute call.
Barclay Todd: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarclay Todd: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:910. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland):As the newly elected member for Clutha-Southland it is a privilege to sit on the Primary Production Committee and to speak on the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill tonight. As we have heard from the Minister for Primary Industries the purpose of this bill is to make the Animal Welfare Act clearer more transparent and easier to enforce.Coming from a farming background and growing up with family pets I believe that how we treat animals is important. But not only that a large part of our international trading reputation rests on how we treat animals and the ethical standards we hold in this regard.We have around 930 dairy farms and over 3500 people employed in the dairy sector in Southland contributing around $1.2 billion to the Southland economy each year. That is just dairy and that is just in Southland.Across all of the animal product categories our country exports such as milk meat and wool New Zealand enjoys around $20 billion a year in earnings. So one of the things this bill includes is new direct protections for New Zealand’s wild animals animals being exported to other countries and animals being used for research because we cannot and we should not underestimate how important our international reputation is in respect of our animal welfare.We have one of the best animal welfare systems in the world and we should be proud of that but it is important that we keep reviewing updating and improving how that system operates. Therefore I commend this bill to the House.
Mallard Trevor: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:910. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Before I call the next member I am going to repeat a comment I made this morning and say it specifically to the member Richard Prosser who has just resumed his seat—who is now no longer an inexperienced member; he is a front-bench member—and that is that Speaker’s ruling 47/1 does apply and I think he should consider himself warned.
Smith Stuart: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Stuart: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:905. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura):I promise to stay away from lipstick and horses.Iain Lees-Galloway: Why did you have to promise that?STUART SMITH: I thought it was necessary. I rise to speak on the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill as someone who has worked all his life with animals—not horses. I was a sheep farmer and having gone through tailing and shearing and those normal day-to-day operations with sheep I have seen the perverse effects of overregulation. I worked on a farm in Ireland where you could not lamb a ewe that got into difficulty; you had to get a vet in. Unfortunately the delays that that led to resulted in unnecessary suffering and in some cases death. So we have to be very careful when we write rules and regulations that they actually are fit for purpose and achieve what they set out to do.I also velveted deer. I had a ticket to velvet deer under anaesthetic so I have had quite a bit of experience in that area. Also I have had experience of being involved in capturing deer out of a helicopter with a net gun using tranquiliser darts at some time and also capturing deer in pens in the bush. I think the point that was made by Damien O’Connor was a very good one about social media and the danger that offers today to us as a trading nation. I think it is very important. We actually have to balance the right to farm against the rights of animals and the right to trade. If we get that balance wrong then we are going to be in trouble. Animal welfare is very much in the mind of the consumers and our trading partners so we must get legislation that actually protects all those rights and balances them. This bill does that in my opinion and I am very pleased to see that it makes it more transparent and easier to manage and it is with great pleasure that I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.
Hayes Joanne: Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:898. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National):Kia ora Mr Deputy Speaker. I stand to take a call on this bill and it is a very short call. I am so pleased Mr Deputy Speaker that you stopped the previous member from blubbing for 10 minutes because I would have got so very very bored with it. I am also very pleased that everybody in the House is agreeing with this bill. It has taken a wee while to get here but the point is it is here and we are moving on and I commend it to the House.Bill read a second time.
Hudson Brett: Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:896. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRETT HUDSON (National):I am delighted with this bill. It is clearly taking on the evils the worries and the concerns around hard-core cartel behaviour but I am really delighted to see that it acknowledges what it refers to as pro-competitive collaboration between firms. In the industry I have been in for 20 years we call that co-opetition where firms will be working together with complementary technology and services to bring benefit to their shared customer. That is co-opetition. But the next day they will be fierce competitors fighting and fighting each other for another customer. In both situations those customers benefit.It is wonderful to see that this bill recognises that both states can exist in an open market such as the one we have and it in fact reflects the way the market will continue to evolve. But it does address the negatives of cartel behaviour and it is important that it does so because if it did not we could end up with that terrible situation where the tiny minority—the nameless and the faceless—are controlling outcomes delivering things that the many do not want. I would not be at all surprised to learn that Grant Robertson supports this bill. I commend it to the House. Thank you.
Lee Melissa: Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLee Melissa: Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:893. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MELISSA LEE (National):I stand to commend the Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill in its second reading and to support it obviously. I would like to begin my contribution by actually giving my congratulations to the previous Commerce Committee members who had done a terrific job with the bill before Parliament ended in the previous term of Parliament. I see in the record of the members who are listed there that the Deputy Speaker the Hon Chester Borrows was actually part of that select committee. I would like to commend the then chairperson Jonathan Young who has done a terrific job in the Commerce Committee. I hope that I can actually live up to his high standards and expectations in our new term of Parliament.There are many members who have actually risen and spoken in favour of this bill and I just want to say a very quick word. Strong capital markets provide a vital source of finance to help our businesses grow and actually create jobs and that is what this Government is actually focused on. They are central to improving the financial well-being of all New Zealanders. We want to ensure that investors have the confidence to invest and that capital markets can broaden and deepen their base and appeal and we want to lift innovation. National is moving the economy towards savings and productive investment and away from borrowing and spending. The Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill promotes economic growth by enabling pro-competitive collaboration between firms while also deterring hard-core cartel conduct and that has to be a good thing. I commend this bill to the House.
Shaw James: Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:890. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMES SHAW (Green):I am rising to speak in support of this bill. I will not take the full call because we think it is a very good bill and we do not really see the need to delay its passage through the House.I do want to acknowledge the work that the Commerce Committee has done on this bill on reviewing it post the select committee hearings. We feel that it has actually been substantially improved over the initial version.I do think it is important to recognise that New Zealand is a very small market. I spent most of my career living in London where the New Zealand economy would sort of fit into one of the London boroughs. I just want to note that in a large market the competition and the variety of players out there will tend to mitigate against cartel-like behaviour. Moving back to New Zealand a few years ago I noticed how in pretty much most market segments there were at most half a dozen players and I also just noticed that with regard to New Zealand prices for a number of reasons but the small number of players being the main one New Zealand consumers pay considerably higher prices than people in other markets.Just coming off of that I also noticed that the international aspect of this is really important both in terms of harmonising our regime with other similar regimes—particularly Australia; I think that is a particularly good aspect of this bill—and also in that our companies are global players. They are exposed to international players as well and it is good that this bill reaches out into the rest of the world and looks at the behaviour of our companies that are operating overseas and also at international businesses that are operating here of which there are obviously very many.The issue of criminal sanctions is the one area that we are most keen on. It is pretty significant that we are placing personal liability at the heart of this bill. It is very easy to see in most of our regulatory regimes in corporate law where a company can be fined or a company can be held liable that that does not necessarily deter bad behaviour on behalf of either the directors or management. In this case because we are actually saying that individuals will be held liable for criminal offences that is going to be a significantly greater deterrent to this kind of behaviour than just maintaining a corporate fines regime.So for those reasons we like this bill. We are very happy with the work that has been done on it and are happy to commend it to the House.
Hayes Joanne: Parole Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Parole Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:887. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National):Kia ora. I have listened to the sound reasoning debate and arguments that have gone on with this bill over the debating period. Really there is only one thing left for me to do. This final task is to commend the bill to the House wholeheartedly. Thank you.Amendments recommended by the Law and Order Committee by majority agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Parole Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Parole Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:885. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I just say to the member that he is better at reading his speech than he is at reading Speakers’ rulings.
Scott Alastair: Parole Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeScott Alastair: Parole Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:885. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa):I rise to support this bill in its second reading. I am proud to be part of a strong National Government that is building a safer New Zealand. We have embarked on a comprehensive programme of reform to protect communities reduce crime and put victims first. I am proud to be part of a strong National Government that is putting victims at the heart of the justice system and delivering on our promises. I am proud to be part of a strong National Government that has plans to reduce unnecessary parole hearings for offenders which will reduce stress for those victims of crime.The purpose of this bill is to amend the Parole Act 2002 to implement National’s post-election action plan to reduce the number of unnecessary parole hearings where the offender has little prospect of release. The Parole Act will be changed to extend the maximum interval between parole hearings from 1 to 2 years and extend the maximum postponement period for offenders serving indeterminate sentences and determinate sentences of 10 or more years from 3 to 5 years.Yet again National is delivering on its promises. National is delivering on its promise to reduce unnecessary parole hearings. Victims of crime should not have to face the very stressful prospect of parole hearings year after year when an offender is clearly not safe to release into the community and has made little or no effort at rehabilitation.Each year there are about 5000 parole hearings. On average offenders have three hearings before being granted parole. Our changes will provide a strong incentive for prisoners to address their offending behaviour. They will also provide greater flexibility for the Parole Board to set hearing dates to align with the completion of rehabilitation programmes. The changes will save an estimated $700000 per annum. National is putting victims first. Thank you.
Shaw James: Parole Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Parole Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:885. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMES SHAW (Green):I apologise for missing the call before. I was distracted by reading Speaker’s ruling 47/1 I believe it was and will attempt to where possible not read from notes. I will compensate by making this a short call to just restate the reasons why the Green Party will not be voting for the Parole Amendment Bill.There are three reasons. First of all the select committee process failed to assuage our concerns that the costs in terms of fairness and justice here would not be offset by the reduced costs and deficiencies.Second a number of people have said that the stress is on the importance of protecting the victims of crime and the families of victims from the trauma of having to go through repeated parole hearings. But we know that at no time are victims obliged to engage with offenders. We have also observed that the Parole Board manages the needs and the sensitivities of these people as they go through that process.Third and finally we understand and we believe that the Parole Board currently has existing tools and mechanisms in place that essentially render this legislation unnecessary. So for those three reasons primarily we will be voting against the bill. Thank you.
McKelvie Ian: Parole Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Parole Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:883. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei):I am almost too frightened to speak. I do want to comment on the bill but I also want to comment on a couple of other things that led up to the bill. In the last Parliament we had the opportunity as the Law and Order Committee—and it was a very valuable opportunity—to visit some parole hearings and in the course of visiting those parole hearings it gave us a very clear view of why we needed to do what we did. I am not sure whether the previous speaker Richard Prosser had the opportunity to visit those parole hearings and I am not sure that I share all of his views but I do eat red meat and I know that he does too.I also think that this bill is a very specific bill dealing with one particular piece of the parole process I guess. It gives the victim some peace from attending repetitious hearings and also gives the criminal or the person who is eligible for a parole hearing an opportunity not to have to be heard when they know clearly that they are not going to get the opportunity to get a result at that parole hearing. So it is all about efficiency. It is about protecting the victim. It is also about taking the pressure off those prisoners who know clearly that they are not going to get the opportunity to get out of prison as a result of that hearing.I think the bill is certainly worthy of support. It certainly does not deal with a broad review of the parole system or anything else. I think our parole system is working very well and I also think from the observations we had in the last Parliament as a result of those Law and Order Committee visits that a large amount of the stuff that goes on in this sector is very good. Unfortunately like everything else we have in this country there are one or two things that slip through the process and that is what gives the parole system its challenges. It is what gives our Department of Corrections a lot of its challenges.I think that this bill goes a long way towards making things easier for a few people in the system and I certainly fully support that. When you go and visit corrections facilities parole hearings and courts you get a very clear view as to why the work that has been done in the last 5 or 6 years by this Government has led to some changes in the law and order system and in the Department of Corrections which I think have done a great deal of service to New Zealand.So that is my lot. I have got no problem supporting this bill. I think it is a good little piece of legislation. Thank you.
Mallard Trevor: Parole Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Parole Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:883. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Before I call the next member I would like to refer members to Speaker’s ruling 47/1 and say that three out of the four speeches—and I will exempt David Clendon—that we have had on this bill today have breached that Speaker’s ruling.
Key John: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 4 to MinisterText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKey John: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 4 to Minister[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:881. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):I seek leave to make a personal explanation to correct an answer I gave to question No. 4 today.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Leave is sought to make a personal explanation. Is there any objection? There is no objection.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In response to a question asked by Dr Woods today as to whether I had had communications with Cameron Slater between 23 November and 25 November regarding the Chisholm inquiry of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security report I said no. Given the member’s primary question was regarding the Chisholm inquiry I answered in that context as that is what I thought I heard her say. Subsequently I have checked the transcript and have realised that the member had also added on to that and asked about the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security report. My corrected answer is no with regard to the Chisholm inquiry and yes in relation to the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security report. On Monday 24 November I received an unsolicited text message from Mr Slater with a reference to the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security report. There was a very short exchange where I briefly acknowledged that text message.
Mallard Trevor: Parole Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Parole Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 26 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:878. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The—sorry Jonathan Young. I was about to promote the member.