edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Brown Simeon; Rurawhe AdrianSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Mr Chair and thank you for the opportunity to take a call on this title and commencement stage of this bill. I'd like to put on record my views in relation to the referendum clause. I won't be supporting this referendum because it's a cop-out clause put forward by the New Zealand First Party to cop out of taking responsibility to make the hard calls to make the hard decisions and to actually look into the issues.I sat here and I listened to Ron Mark get up and give a lecture to this Parliament and talk about this as being a serious issue of conscience for the nation. That is the first call that I've heard Ron Mark get up in Parliament and take on this bill and it's probably the last call that he'll be taking on this serious issue of conscience. I tell Ron Mark: if this is a serious issue of conscience it's not just whether the bill goes to a referendum but what does that bill look like and what is the shape of that bill when it goes to referendum? Because there is more to the issue than just simply putting something to a referendum. I just think the New Zealand First Party should be ashamed of themselves for this cop-out position that they continually take on serious issues rather than being part of the debate taking part in the issue and actually looking at the issue and engaging in it like every other member of Parliament in this Parliament has. It is an absolute cop-out position from the New Zealand First Party.I have a lot of respect for those who take a position that a referendum is something which might be needed to be looked at and is a position where the public should have a say. But when the party continues—continues—to ignore the process and continues to not engage in the process that is something which I consider an absolute cop out. They'll go traveling up and down the country over the next six months telling all the people that they see: Oh yes we voted for a referendum so that you could have your say." and "Oh yes it's such a terrible bill; we voted for a referendum but the rest of the Parliament didn't." They'll try and convince New Zealanders that they're on the conservative side of this issue but I tell you New Zealand First New Zealanders will see through it. I can tell you that tomorrow afternoon we're going to be in this House and can you give this Parliament and your supporters a guarantee that you'll be voting as a block against the bill if the referendum doesn't go through? Alfred Ngaro asked that question and Ron Mark didn't even give it an answer. He said—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm sorry to interrupt the member but it has come time for me to leave the chair. The committee is suspended and I will resume the chair at 9 a.m. tomorrow for the extended sitting.Debate interrupted.Sitting suspended from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Wednesday)"
Seymour David; Rurawhe AdrianDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): In light of that I move that the question be now put.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Unfortunately you don't say the beginning bit; you must only move the motion and then I would have—David Seymour: It was still worth it. I move the question be now put.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): No no it's too late now.
SpeechCHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Jan Logie's amendment to clause 11 set out on Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 325 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee in relation to this SOP in Part 1. Jan Logie's amendment to clause 11 in relation to section 182(1) set out on SOP 326 is out of order as being outside the scope of the bill.
Little AndrewHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Justice): Thank you Madam Chair. I'm obliged to have the opportunity to respond to Simeon Brown in relation to Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 470.Can I just before I embark on a direct response to his question that he poses—and really in response to actually an earlier comment by Alfred Ngaro which is when Alfred Ngaro quoted from the Law Commission's report. The Law Commission was very clear about specifying as an alternative that the Parliament could consider setting up a separate stand-alone kind of regulatory or disciplinary body or as they said in paragraph 6.78 on page 118 of their report An alternative to creating a new regulatory offence would be to rely on the existing health practitioner disciplinary regime to address any failures by health practitioners to comply with the statutory requirements … The same consequences would then apply to health practitioners who fail to comply with abortion law as for other kinds of professional misconduct … The current grounds for disciplining health practitioners already appear broad enough to capture situations where a practitioner fails to apply the statutory test for abortion. A practitioner may be disciplined for an act or omission that amounts to negligence or is likely to bring discredit to the profession." So the regime at the moment doesn't just deal with strict legal issues; it deals with the professional and you might say ethical issues as well.So to answer specifically Simeon Brown's question "What is the Health and Disability Commissioner's role or right?" it is having investigated to order a number of possible remedies—one is an apology to a person who has been harmed in the provision of medical services; the other is to refer the matter to the director of proceedings. So that's the director of proceedings who looks after provisions under the Human Rights Act and indeed under the Health Disciplinary—I'm going to get the term right in a minute—the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal or to refer to the relevant professional body. So it could be to the Medical Association; it could be to the college of "whatever" for that professional body. So all of those provisions are there. That regime is there now that Alfred Ngaro's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 470 would otherwise set out—and if we adopt that SOP we'd be replicating what is already there.What can the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal do? They can do a number of things. In terms of penalties they can cancel or suspend registration. They can impose conditions on practice. They can censure the practitioner or impose a fine. So there is a full range of responses there that the Health and Disability Commissioner can trigger having investigated somebody who has been mistreated or poorly treated or let down by an abortion service provider. So I hope that answers the question for Mr Brown."
Lubeck MarjaMARJA LUBECK (Labour): I move That the question be now put.
Rurawhe AdrianCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! Before I call the Minister can I ask members of the public in the gallery—this debate is for members of Parliament. They are the only ones that can contribute to this debate. Applause from the gallery is not permitted actually and so I'm going to ask members of the public to observe that rule and I call the Hon Andrew Little.
Rurawhe AdrianABORTION LEGISLATION BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed from 10 March.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Members the House is in committee on the Abortion Legislation Bill.Hon Jacqui Dean: Mr Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Are you calling for a point of order?Hon Jacqui Dean: No. I seek to move an instruction to the committee.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm sorry; you're too late.Hon Jacqui Dean: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm going to rule on the first part OK? It is too late to move an instruction to the committee. That should have been done when we were still in the House. OK? So if you've got a further point of order which is different to that I'll take the point of order.Hon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Thank you Mr Chair. I have been seeking a call for quite some time calling out Mr Chair" and that call has not been answered. That is not my fault.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm sorry; I'm the chair of the committee of the whole House. You should have been seeking that point of order with the Speaker of the House. Also at the first order of business I actually read out what we're doing in committee which I'm trying to do. I'll start again. The House is in committee on the Abortion Legislation Bill. Members when we were last considering this bill we had concluded considering Part 1. We now come to consider Part 2. Members Jan Logie's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 326 seeks to amend clause 11 of the bill to insert a new amendment to the Crimes Act 1961. That would substantially amend the key elements of the offence of killing an unborn child. This amendment is outside the scope of the bill as the bill only amends this offence for the purposes of clarifying that lawfully provided abortion services do not constitute that offence. This amendment therefore cannot be debated and will not be voted on. The other amendments in SOP 326 are in order and will be voted on. The question is that Part 2 stand part."
Hipkins ChrisAPPROPRIATION (2018/19 CONFIRMATION AND VALIDATION) BILLFirst ReadingHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House) on behalf of the Minister of Finance: I move That the Appropriation (2018/19 Confirmation and Validation) Bill be now read a first time.
Hipkins ChrisSITTINGS OF THE HOUSEHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That the sitting of the House today be extended into tomorrow morning for the committee stage of the Abortion Legislation Bill the third reading of the Taxation (KiwiSaver Student Loans and Remedial Matters) Bill the instruction to the committee for the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Bill the first reading of the Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill the committee stage of the Privacy Bill the first reading of the Regulatory Systems (Transport) Amendment Bill and the first reading of the Organic Products Bill.
Government Statement and Responses — COVID-19—Emergency Economic Package
Hipkins Chris; Mallard TrevorTUESDAY 17 MARCH 2020The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS OF THE HOUSEHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I seek leave for a Government statement and responses on the Government's emergency economic package consisting of two 15-minute speeches seven 10-minute speeches and one five-minute speech as agreed by the parties. SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Wednesday 22 July 2020 - Volume 748
Wednesday 29 July 2020 - Volume 748
Thursday 30 July 2020 - Volume 748
Tuesday 4 August 2020 - Volume 748
Tuesday 4 August 2020 (continued on Wednesday 5 August 2020) - Volume 748
Wednesday 22 July 2020 (continued on Thursday 23 July 2020) - Volume 748
Equal Pay Amendment Bill — In Committee
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 548 in the name of the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway to Part 1 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 40New Zealand National 40.Amendments agreed to.Part 1 as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 548 in the name of the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway to Part 2 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 40New Zealand National 40.Amendments agreed to.Part 2 as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 548 in the name of the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway to Schedule 1 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 40New Zealand National 40.Amendments agreed to.Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 548 in the name of the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway to Schedule 2 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 40New Zealand National 40.Amendments agreed to.Schedule 2 as amended agreed to.Clause 1 agreed to.Clause 2The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 548 in the name of the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway to Clause 2 be agreed to.Amendment agreed to.Clause 2 as amended agreed to.Clause 3 agreed to.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Equal Pay Amendment Bill with amendment.Report adopted.
Crown Pastoral Land Reform Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Crown Pastoral Land Reform Bill be read a first time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 42New Zealand National 40; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Environment Committee.
Rates Rebate (Statutory Declarations) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Rates Rebate (Statutory Declarations) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 42New Zealand National 40; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a third time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Forests (Regulation of Log Traders and Forestry Advisers) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 42New Zealand National 40; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a third time.
Forests (Regulation of Log Traders and Forestry Advisers) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 543 in the name of the Hon Shane Jones be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 42New Zealand National 40; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon Shane Jones to clause 7 be agreed to: in clause 7 new section 63D(1) replace section 41(2A) of the State Sector Act 1988" with "clause 2(6) of Schedule 6 of the Public Service Legislation Act 2020".in clause 7 new section 63D(2) replace "section 41(2A)(a) of the State Sector Act 1988" with "clause 2(6)(a) of Schedule 6 of the Public Service Legislation Act 2020".in clause 7 new section 63D(3) replace "section 41 of the State Sector Act 1988" with "clause 2 of Schedule 6 of the Public Service Legislation Act 2020".in clause 7 new section 63E(6) replace "section 42 of the State Sector Act 1988" with "clause 4 of Schedule 6 of the Public Service Legislation Act 2020".in clause 7 new section 63E(7) replace "section 41(2B) to (2F) of the State Sector Act 1988 which provides" with "clauses 2 and 3 of Schedule 6 of the Public Service Legislation Act 2020 which provide".A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 42New Zealand National 40; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Parts 1 and 2 the Schedule and clauses 1 to 3 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 42New Zealand National 40; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Parts 1 and 2 the Schedule and clauses 1 to 3 as amended agreed to.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Forests (Regulation of Log Traders and Forestry Advisers) Amendment Bill with amendment.Report adopted."
Forests (Regulation of Log Traders and Forestry Advisers) Amendment Bill — In Committee
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Urban Development Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 54New Zealand National 52; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a third time.
Urban Development Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 64New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8; Ross.Noes 52New Zealand National 52.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 542 in the name of the Hon Phil Twyford be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 54New Zealand National 52; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 515 in the name of Jami-Lee Ross to clause 20 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 1Ross.Noes 116New Zealand National 52; New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8; ACT New Zealand 1.Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Parts 1 to 6 Schedules 1 to 4 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 54New Zealand National 52; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Parts 1 to 6 Schedules 1 to 4 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Urban Development Bill with amendment.Report adopted.
Urban Development Bill — In Committee
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Public Service Bill and the Public Finance Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 54New Zealand National 52; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bills read a third time.
Public Service Bill & Public Finance Amendment Bill — Third Readings
Public Service Legislation Bill — In Committee—Clauses 1 & 2 (continued)
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 54New Zealand National 52; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Clause 1 agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 549 in the name of the Hon Chris Hipkins to clause 2 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 54New Zealand National 52; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendment agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That clause 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 54New Zealand National 52; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Clause 2 as amended agreed to.The committee divided the bill into the Public Service Bill and the Public Finance Amendment Bill as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 550.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Public Service Legislation Bill with amendment and divided into the Public Service Bill and the Public Finance Amendment Bill.Report adopted.
12. Question No. 12—Internal AffairsMARK PATTERSON (NZ First) to the Minister of Internal AffairsQuestion No. 12—Internal Affairs12. MARK PATTERSON (NZ First) to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What recent announcements has she made to help support firefighters throughout New Zealand?Hon TRACEY MARTIN (Minister of Internal Affairs): It was my privilege to recently announce over $50 million worth of upgrades and repairs to fire stations across the country. This involves improvements to 26 fire stations across the country ranging from total replacement of old stations or ones with significant seismic issues through to partial refurbishments and improvements for obsolete facilities. I'd like to specifically highlight Christchurch City Sumner and Kaikōura who will all finally receive new fire stations after theirs were damaged in earthquakes. For a long time communities have been waiting to see firefighters housed in facilities that make their difficult jobs just a bit easier. These projects will help our firefighters. They will help their communities and create local jobs.Mark Patterson: Why are these improvements needed and is this the total amount to be spent by Government and Fire and Emergency New Zealand to improve the conditions of our career and volunteer firefighters?Hon TRACEY MARTIN: In answer to the first part of the question this funding will provide for decontamination facilities to be constructed at Ōkaihau station. Decontamination facilities enable firefighters coming home from a fire to remove equipment safely and prevent carcinogens from smoke being brought into living and eating areas of stations. It will also support rural brigades whose facilities are obsolete or no longer fit for purpose including the Cavalli brigade which is currently operating from a pair of shipping containers. This funding will allow a brand new station to be built for these firefighters. For a period of time these dedicated firefighters didn't even have a toilet because their portaloo was stolen by local criminals. In answer to the second part of the question no. In addition to this funding Fire and Emergency has also budgeted $38 million for property upgrades in 2021. Since its formation on 1 July 2017 Fire and Emergency has invested over $120 million in capital property works. I believe that fire stations should be up to the same standard as the amazing people who operate from them and these upgrades will help accelerate that process.
11. Question No. 11—Research Science and InnovationDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National) to the Minister of Research Science and InnovationQuestion No. 11—Research Science and Innovation11. Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National) to the Minister of Research Science and Innovation: Why considering it was due to be released in June 2019 has the Government not yet released its Research Science and Innovation Strategy?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for Trade and Export Growth) on behalf of the Minister of Research Science and Innovation: The tentative June date was set but sector participants recommended a broader round of public consultation which they preferred to a quicker process. It was then intended that the strategy would be released earlier this year but COVID intervened. I then decided to put the release of the long-term strategy on hold while we responded to the COVID-19 epidemic. On behalf of the Minister I intend to revise the strategy in light of COVID and will complete this following this year's election if re-elected. Dr Parmjeet Parmar: How can she use COVID-19 as an excuse when COVID-19 did not hit New Zealand until February this year and the Research Science and Innovation Strategy was due to be released in June last year?SPEAKER: Can I—oh no; the member can answer it. But can I just recommend to members that they listen to the answer before they go for a pre-prepared supplementary.Hon DAVID PARKER: I gave that explanation in my answer to the primary question.Dr Parmjeet Parmar: Does she accept that if she had released the strategy on time there could have been more investment in innovation in Budget 2020 as a Government report from early last year suggested different investment in innovation until the Research Science and Innovation Strategy is released?Hon DAVID PARKER: No and in fact the sector will benefit from the $401.3 million funding boost that was in Budget 2020 which included a lift to Crown Research Institutes funding of approximately $196 million; plus that fund also includes the COVID response and recovery fund. And of course since COVID the Minister has rapidly stood up the $25 million COVID-19 Innovation Acceleration Fund to accelerate the development and deployment of innovative solutions and to support research to alleviate the impacts of COVID-19.Dr Parmjeet Parmar: What does it say about the importance her Government is placing on the research science and innovation sector that she has failed to release the strategy creating uncertainty for the sector which is already struggling to rebound from COVID-19?Hon DAVID PARKER: I thank the member for the opportunity to inform the House that the assertions in that question are quite wrong for the reasons I've previously explained.
5. Question No. 5—Local GovernmentWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of Local GovernmentQuestion No. 5—Local Government5. WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of Local Government: What recent announcements has the Government made about supporting councils to improve their drinking-water infrastructure?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): Earlier this month the Prime Minister announced a $761 million investment to support councils' investment into their water network across the country. Our water infrastructure is run down and urgently needs to be upgraded. That's why we're working alongside councils to address some immediate and long-term challenges to reform the way in which water services are provided so that no matter where someone lives they will have clean safe drinking-water cleaner lakes streams and rivers.Willow-Jean Prime: What has the Government done to futureproof our drinking water in the wake of the 2016 Havelock North water disaster?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: We're in the process of standing up Taumata Arowai the water services regulator which will be responsible for the comprehensive enforcement and compliance of drinking-water standards and will start to collect a comprehensive set of data relating to waste and storm water systems. This will help drive a more consistent approach to our water management system. The $761 million will be used to bring forward planned infrastructure for repairs maintenance and renewals to act as direct stimulus for the local economy.Willow-Jean Prime: Will councils have to amalgamate?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: No and it's important to stress that the water reform agenda is asking councils to rethink the delivery of water services so that ratepayers receive the full benefit of scale and cost sharing. Importantly what I'm asking councils to consider is a world-class water management system that doesn't burden future generations because of the current inefficient model. The Government is acutely aware of the significance of the proposed reform programme on other roles and functions of local government. That's why we're working with them.Willow-Jean Prime: What if councils do not opt in? Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Good question. The approach I'm taking to water reform is about working with the sector. It's an opt-in approach. A sign of this is a partnership approach that we've established with local government in our three waters steering committee. The group is now undertaking engagement with the sector to explain in more detail the opportunities of the stimulus package and the approach to water reform. If a council chooses not to participate the region will still benefit because we need councils thinking strategically about the long-term challenges ahead of them to achieve a reliable nationwide water network and efficient service delivery.
4. Question No. 4—FinanceHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 4—Finance 4. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Finance: Is he confident his policies and actions are providing businesses with as much certainty as possible so that they can invest and create new jobs with confidence?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I am confident that that is the case. For example our policy of not putting the economy at risk by reopening the borders until it is entirely safe to do so is part of our plan to minimise our risk of a second wave of infections. This gives businesses the certainty that this Government is focused on keeping our economy as the most open economy in the world with the fewest restrictions on domestic movement and activity allowing them to invest and create jobs.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why does the Deputy Prime Minister have a list of so-called shovel-ready projects but the contractors trying to save jobs don't have any certainty about most of the projects?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I disagree with the latter part of that question. There are plenty of people who are now with a great deal of certainty looking towards the more than three-quarters of a billion dollars' worth of announced infrastructure reference group projects. The fact of the matter is that some of the contractors will be bidding into a commercial situation. We have to make sure that we have all the ducks in a row before we undertake that process.Hon Paul Goldsmith: When he declined to confirm yesterday that each project is being announced immediately after due diligence has been completed by Ministers he mentioned other factors; was political calculation the primary other factor?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No. As discussed commercial negotiations would be another factor. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Can he explain to the House how it provides certainty to developers for the Government to prevent the development of more than 400 new houses at Ihumātao and more than a year later for the entire situation to remain in limbo?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What I can say is that in contrast to the houses that may or may not have been built at Ihumātao we can see on this side of the House thousands of public houses built in contrast to the sell-off by the other Government.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he have any advice on the number of jobs that have been lost by the prevention of houses being built at Ihumātao?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No. And as the member knows from the answer I gave yesterday Treasury are projecting an increase in the net number of people in employment by the end of the year.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he accept that the Government's intervention at Ihumātao has undermined the certainty of property rights in this country one of the foundations of job creation?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Absolutely not.
2. Question No. 2—FinanceJAMIE STRANGE (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 2—Finance2. JAMIE STRANGE (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What reactions has he seen to the Government's economic response to COVID-19?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I've seen a huge number of positive reactions from people who have taken the time to contact the Government to say what a difference the support has made to their business during COVID-19. One business owner wrote to us to say Thank you to you and your team for your mahi to date. The quick response with the wage subsidy has saved our small business and kept our nine workers in full pay all through lockdown and beyond. Our workers are content and appreciative. The result means there is a boost to their wellbeing and they're feeling positive about the future." Another said "A heartfelt thankyou for the second subsidy. That will keep me afloat until spring when business will flourish again in its pre-COVID status and the profits over summer will maintain us over the quieter winter period."Jamie Strange: What reactions has he seen to the impacts of the Government's economic response to COVID-19?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We've had many businesses contact us to say what a difference the Government's decisive early economic response has made to their business outlook now that we have the virus under control and business activity is returning to normal. A director at a dairy firm said that the Government can take some of the credit for the biggest upward move in Fonterra's global dairy prices for several years. They said "Because we locked down early and eliminated COVID-19 this meant our dairy economy could get going quickly and gave the world especially China confidence to buy our product." Another medium-sized business owner contacted us to say "Your actions and support over the first stages of COVID-19 have been a lifeline to my businesses our 50-odd staff and hundreds of suppliers we work alongside. Without the wage support scheme and the small business loan scheme it would've been impossible to stay afloat and your decisive action has meant a quick positive return to business." I'm pleased to see that our support for business is having the desired effect of improving cash flow and confidence.Jamie Strange: What reactions has he seen to the Government's fiscal management of the economic response to COVID-19?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I've seen many positive reactions to the Government's fiscal management as we navigate through this unprecedented global pandemic. One New Zealander has written to the Government to say it was a very wise move to hold back $14 billion of the COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund in contingency. I've also seen other reactions from commentators in the media including Cameron Bagrie who said it was sensible and well-known socialist Mike Hosking who said "credit where credit is due" and that in comparison to other countries "there are those that started off worse than us and we will still end up a lot better off than many.""
Public Service Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 7
Public Service Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 6
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 549 and 558 in the name of the Hon Chris Hipkins to Part 6 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 53New Zealand National 51; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 6 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 53New Zealand National 51; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Part 6 as amended agreed to.
Public Service Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 5
VoteThe question was put that the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 549 in the name of the Hon Chris Hipkins to Part 5 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 53New Zealand National 51; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendments as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 556 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 52New Zealand National 51; Ross.Noes 64New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8; ACT New Zealand 1.Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 5 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 53New Zealand National 51; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Part 5 as amended agreed to.
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 549 in the name of the Hon Chris Hipkins to Part 4 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 53New Zealand National 51; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 4 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 53New Zealand National 51; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Part 4 as amended agreed to.
Public Service Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 4
Public Service Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 3
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 52New Zealand National 51; Ross.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 549 in the name of the Hon Chris Hipkins to Part 3 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 53New Zealand National 51; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 3 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 53New Zealand National 51; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Part 3 as amended agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 54; Ross.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 549 in the name of the Hon Chris Hipkins to Part 2 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 54; Ross.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 54; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Public Service Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 2
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 54; Ross.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Papers 549 and 558 in the name of the Hon Chris Hipkins to Part 1 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 54; Ross.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to Part 1 be agreed to: In clause 10(1)(e)(v) replace agencies." with "agencies; and"After clause 10(1)(e) insert:Economy(f)to spend money wisely and effectively.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 55New Zealand National 54; Ross.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Amendments not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 54; Ross.Part 1 as amended agreed to."
Public Service Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 1
Dairy Industry Restructuring Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee
Rurawhe AdrianDAIRY INDUSTRY RESTRUCTURING AMENDMENT BILL (NO 3)In CommitteeCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): The committee is suspended until 9 a.m.Sitting suspended from 12 a.m. to 9 a.m.
Wood Michael; Rurawhe AdrianSITTINGS OF THE HOUSEMICHAEL WOOD (Senior Whip—Labour): In light of the very good progress that the House has made I would move that the House duly suspend for the evening—I would seek leave.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Yes but you realise that will end urgency?MICHAEL WOOD: I do now but it may be that by this time—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Are you seeking leave that we—I will put the House in—we're almost at midnight. I think the way forward is that I will put the House in committee and the committee will resume at 9.00 a.m.
Lubeck MarjaMARJA LUBECK (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. It is an absolute privilege to take a short call on this bill. The member who just resumed her seat Maggie Barry in a previous debate commended Kristine Bartlett on her tenacity going through these years of court cases. That was more than a little disingenuous because the National Party previously prevented Kristine Bartlett and her union from actually settling. So that comment from that member was an absolutely disingenuous comment.But I would like to focus on the positive. This is tonight a very historic moment. This bill has been a very long time in the making and I'm glad that at midnight we are passing a bill that is a start to addressing the unacceptable gender pay gap that still exists after decades of discrimination and prejudice in female-dominated industries. Luckily we're not passing the National Party's bill that they tried to pass push through in 2017 trying to prevent women from ever getting to pay equity because that's what that bill would have done and the member's bill was an exact copy—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! We are debating the third reading of this bill not another bill.MARJA LUBECK: Thank you Mr Speaker. This bill is absolutely the right way to start addressing that unacceptable pay gap that still exists. So in this bill we are now seeing a tidy-up where we're setting a lower threshold to get claims through in a simpler and more accessible way for women to progress those claims. I would like to congratulate all the women and all the people that have been fighting for so many years for pay equity—the Ministers and officials who have worked tirelessly on this piece of legislation tidied up all the many complex issues that there were to tidy up. They have done excellent work in this legislation and I commend it to the House. Thank you Mr Speaker.Bill read a third time.
Equal Pay Amendment Bill — Third Reading
SpeechHon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise to speak at the third reading of the Equal Pay Amendment Bill as I have at the other two readings. I think that the bill is as many have said one whose time has come. These have been very slow very small steps towards something that is inevitable. This bill makes a contribution to that.As far as I'm concerned when I look at the way in which this country has managed its pay equity this is another step along the way in the right direction. It's been a long time coming. It's taken quite a lot of time. I find it extraordinary that in the midst of COVID recovery challenges and the issues facing the economy a bill of this kind is—in the same way as the previous three bills—being done under urgency at six minutes to midnight on a Thursday night. It is unnecessary and bizarre and reflects badly on the way that the Government has organised its legislative programme.Hon Tracey Martin: It could have been done in nine years under a National Government of course.Hon MAGGIE BARRY: Is that a Chihuahua I hear in the corner of the Chamber? We've heard enough of that strange noise and I guess after the dinner break and at this time of night some members have become tired and emotional. We'll ignore them as we always do. But equal pay—Hon Tracey Martin: Nice way to devalue contributions.Hon MAGGIE BARRY: —is the principle here Madam Chihuahua" on the other side and that is a principle that is worth doing and worth talking about.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! Order! I'm on my feet. No you cannot refer to another member of the House in that manner. I don't know who you were speaking about but if it's a member of the House you must not do that.Hon MAGGIE BARRY: Duly noted. Thank you. Getting back to the substance of this bill which we support—we don't support the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) or some of the nonsense that has been said around the bill. But the principle is there: the unlawful discrimination claims—the things that we've all fought and talked about for a number of years. This is not a bill that needs to take up any further time; it has taken quite enough time thanks to the slackness of this Government to get to the stage where it is today. So I commend the bill to the House but we oppose SOP 548 for very good reason that has been extensively covered already and we will leave it at that. Thank you Mr Speaker."
Stanford EricaERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): I'm very pleased this evening to take what will be a very short call on the Equal Pay Amendment Bill and I say a very short call" because I understand that we want to get this bill passed tonight and I think that we should. The dreams I have for my daughter and my grandchildren—one day when I have them hopefully—is that they will grow up in a country where the work that they do is equally valued and compensated equally to that of their male counterparts. This bill sets out the framework that we will achieve that outcome. I want to acknowledge tonight the Minister Julie Anne Genter who has done an exceptional job. She did an exceptional job earlier answering our questions and has done a great job shepherding this bill through the House and I commend her for that. She's been outstanding.I also wanted to do a mention of my colleague Denise Lee who has done an exceptional amount of work on our side of the House on this bill. We know as was noted earlier that she brought a member's bill to the House in her name to try and progress this legislation more quickly through the House. It was a frustration of hers that this wasn't being progressed as quickly as it could have been. We note that the gender pay gap has remained the same for the last three years which just isn't good enough. But we are here tonight to pass this bill so that we can address that imbalance so that for women of today our children and our grandchildren will grow up in a country where their work is valued and paid and compensated fairly and in accordance with that of their male counterparts. With that I commend the bill to the House."
SpeechHon TRACEY MARTIN (Minister for Children): Kia ora Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak to the Equal Pay Amendment Bill. I want to put on the Hansard the name of Rachael Baxter-Mackay one of the women who actually signed the court action so that social workers would enter the process to create a standard of equal pay compared to their male counterparts inside the world of skills. It is 10 to midnight on a Thursday night and something of real importance is about to happen and that is that women will finally see themselves and their skills measured against their male counterparts. The fact that we need legislation to make sure that they are measured for their skills against males who have the same distresses me. The fact that the National Party now finds themselves able to support that at third reading even though at the committee of the whole House stage they voted against every amendment to do so is a good thing. But they do so at 10 to midnight on a Thursday night.We should not require ourselves to be measured against men. We should be recognised for our skills as women inside the workforce but finally after a debacle in the last Parliament where the National Party put hoops and barriers in the way of women to be able to be recognised and the value that they bring to society finally at 10 to midnight we are finally going to pass a piece of legislation that will write what we have all known for decades. So I don't know how to make this more important but to say that New Zealand First not only commends this bill to the House it commends every woman who has stood throughout the decades to get us to this point including Rachael Baxter-Mackay who put her name on a court case to take this forward to get the Government to recognise that women need to be paid equally for their skills. Kia ora.
McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): I raise a point of order Mr Chair. I seek leave of the House to apologise to the Minister. I've had three texts telling me people are listening to what went on in the House!CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I don't think we need to have leave of the House to do that but I'm sure the committee of the whole House thanks you. Are there any more?