edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Williams PotoThe CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): The question is that the Minister's amendment set out Supplementary Order Paper 6 be agreed to. All those in favour say Aye; all those against say No. The Ayes have it. [Interruption] A party vote is called for. The Clerk will conduct a party vote.Hon Ruth Dyson: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Sorry can I just get a point of clarification? Are you putting the leave? Are you putting the procedural motion?The CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): You are correct; I have made an error. The question is that the question be now put.Jami-Lee Ross: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. A vote was commenced. You cannot stop a vote once it's been commenced.The CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): I'm sorry; I made an error of procedure. I will put the leave for the question to be put. The question is—Jami-Lee Ross: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. We started a vote. You called a vote. You can't stop a vote that's been called.The CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Let me take some advice on that. [Chairperson seeks advice] Members I do want to say that there were no members taking a call so the decision is that we will continue with the vote as put.Hon Ruth Dyson: So what are we voting on? We're voting on the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP)?The CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): We're voting on the SOP.
Coffey TamatiTAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki): Thank you Madam Chair. I rise also to support this bill and I want to acknowledge the contribution from Marja Lubeck the previous speaker who pointed out quite rightly that it's taken quite a long time to get a bit of action in this area. She spoke of the Rena disaster which in 2011 caused catastrophic disaster to the whānau the hapū and the iwi that were living along the coastline in the Bay of Plenty area that I represent. It will always be ingrained into my memory the images of our whānau out there with their white disposable suits on clearing rubbish and clearing the oil spilt from the Rena disaster from their beaches. They were picking up dead birds and they were picking up dead animals and dead sea life and all because there weren't tight enough rules I guess around what the Rena was—well against the crisis that actually happened there. So if this bill actually moves to address some of that then I'm incredibly supportive of it.I remember last night just before we wrapped up the member for Hutt South was also looking forward to this as well so—[Makes finger gun gesture] just for you. Here we go.Let's drill down into some of the amendments that have been made—kind of in the final stages here—and I specifically wanted to talk about the compulsion of drug and alcohol testing that has been taken out. As a small-business owner myself I would do anything to minimise compliance costs and admin costs and things that weren't deemed to be absolutely necessary. So as a result of that recommendations have been put forward that the random drug-testing requirement was not evidence-led policy-making and so for that reason it's been taken out. It was also pointed out that a significant majority of those commercial operators are already required to have appropriate drug and alcohol management systems as part of their marine operator safety systems as well. So with those kinds of precautions in place it makes good sense to actually have removed that particular requirement out of this bill.The officials actually noted—and I quote—We do not have the data to know the true scale of the problem or if there is a problem … Until we know the true extent we will not know what the appropriate level of intervention is." So again it was another good reason to have taken that particular amendment that particular piece out. It was also noted that it's very difficult to know to what extent alcohol or drug use is involved in accidents in the commercial maritime sector.I reiterate: there's a lot of costs already on small-business owners. In canvassing the contributions made from people like that who were small-business owners that were going to have to make themselves compliant with this random drug and alcohol testing—by taking it out it removes quite a bit of cost and headache really that had been unnecessarily put in there.I also would like to just finish off by congratulating the Associate Minister of Transport Julie Anne Genter for really championing this. I think this is a great piece of legislation and I commend it on behalf of the people of my electorate to this House."
Williams PotoMARITIME TRANSPORT AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed from 5 December.The CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Members we turn first to the Maritime Transport Amendment Bill. When we were last considering this bill the committee was debating all provisions as one question by leave. In terms of voting I understand the leave granted was for a vote on the Minister's amendments and then a vote that all provisions as amendments stand part. We will proceed accordingly. The question is that Parts 1 to 3 schedules 1 and 2 and clauses 1 to 3 stand part. Marja Lubeck had the call and she has four minutes and 20 seconds remaining.
Points of Order — Speakers' Rulings—Interpretation of Speaker's Ruling 20/5
Speaker's Statements — Rules—Chamber Lobby and Galleries
Ministerial Statements — Drinking-water Supplies—Contamination Havelock North Inquiry Stage 2 Released
Carter David; Mallard TrevorPOINTS OF ORDERSpeakers' Rulings—Timing of Commenting onRt Hon DAVID CARTER (National): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to ask you to give serious consideration to a considered ruling to points that were raised at the start of question time around retrospectively raising points of order. I did not make that point at the time because I considered that your patience was getting to a stage when it may have been dangerous to do so. But as you and I know when we go back and look at Hansard subsequent to question time we often see pieces in that Hansard that we wish to question and raise with the Speaker.You and I both sat on the Standing Orders Committee and were both partly responsible for the inclusion of Speaker's ruling 20/5 around the ability to raise issues retrospectively. You will remember without doubt the history of why that particular point was put into the report of the Standing Orders Committee and consequently into Speakers' rulings. I think it is a very dangerous precedent that could be potentially made by your initial ruling today that unless matters are raised instantly they cannot be raised at all. I ask whether you would consider the points that I think were raised considerately by members at the start of question time particularly by Opposition members have a look at Hansard again and perhaps come back to the House with a considered ruling and the ability for us to raise retrospectively points of order that we think are worthwhile raising.There was no discussion that I recall during the deliberations of the Standing Orders Committee about a stage by which such concerns were raised privately with the Speaker in his office. Members of Parliament—Opposition and Government—have rights to raise points of order and I ask you to reconsider very carefully your original initial ruling made at the start of question time today.Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: No no I don't want any assistance with this. I want to thank my right honourable predecessor for his intervention. I will seek further advice on this. Clearly we have different memories of the reasoning behind this and the methodology to be used and if it's shown that his memory is better than mine which I wouldn't at all be surprised by then I will come back to the House.
Mallard TrevorSPEAKER'S STATEMENTSChamber Lobbies and Galleries—Visitors' RulesMr SPEAKER: The rules governing visitors to the public and Speaker's galleries have been updated to modernise requirements about dress to give clarity about items that can be brought into the galleries and to clarify the powers of security officers. The rules apply to the public and Speaker's galleries and not to the press gallery. The rules governing the lobbies and the Chamber update the provisions governing strangers in the Chamber to enable officials advising Ministers in the committee of the whole House to step on to the floor of the Chamber to speak briefly with the Minister in the chair. Officials will be allowed to bring electronic devices into the Chamber when advising Ministers. Whānau or staff members will be able to enter the lobbies in order to enable members to care for infants. An updated copy of the rules will be delivered to members this afternoon.
Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Attorney-General): Thank you Mr Speaker. I will just in the time available read out a couple of other quotes from the report: there is little understanding amongst the New Zealand public about the number of people who are consuming water that is not demonstrably safe the large numbers of people who become ill every year or the burden this places on the country including at its highest through lost lives." The inquiry panel members then comment on the fact that even since Havelock North there has been very little improvement. In the last year they say there's been only a 1.1 percent improvement in respect of the problematic areas and that shields some decreases in those areas. They say that we "compare poorly internationally." They say that "The Ministry's performance in relation to enforcement has been … seriously deficient." Indeed it is apparent even after Havelock North that effectively the ministry had to be led by the inquiry rather than the inquiry being assisted by the ministry. They say that there's been a complete failure of leadership and stewardship with the ministry for some years. Can I thank the other party leaders for their comments."
Shaw JamesHon JAMES SHAW (Leader—Green): Thank you Mr Speaker. I would like to acknowledge the two people who likely lost their lives because of what occurred in Havelock North last year and their loved ones for whom I imagine today could be yet another very difficult day in their grieving process. On behalf of the Green Party I would like to extend my sincerest condolences to them. I'd also like to acknowledge the more than 5000 people who fell ill simply because of the water that they drank. It is an absolute disgrace what happened to the people of Havelock North. All New Zealanders should be able to trust the water that comes out of their taps and we should not live in fear of it.The Green Party campaigned as did our colleagues in the Labour Party on the issue of clean drinking-water during this year's election and our choice to do so was made with good reason. We did it because of what happened to the people of Havelock North and our determination that it would never happen again.Aotearoa New Zealand is a wealthy privileged sophisticated country. It is unconscionable that in 2016 in New Zealand we had people who lost their lives and thousands of people falling ill because they drank a glass of water washed their hands or ate something that they washed from a tap. But it did happen and that is why this report released today is so important. We cannot allow what happened to the people of Havelock North to happen again ever anywhere.I'd like to acknowledge the work that has gone into this report. It is a comprehensive piece of work and it has clear recommendations that I know that this Government will consider seriously and urgently. I know that this Government is committed to improving water quality across the board and this report rightly focuses on our drinking water but that is connected to our rivers our lakes our aquifers and our oceans all of which are under threat from pollution and degradation.Within this report are recommendations around the safety standards and classifications of our drinking water around compliance and enforcement of standards and for more oversight over our water supply by both regional councils and central government. There is also a stark warning contained within the report that 20 percent of New Zealanders are living in areas that are vulnerable to outbreaks similar to what happened in Havelock North. For those people it is absolutely essential that we have stronger enforceable drinking-water standards and much more robust systems that respond quickly when those standards are breached. It is also absolutely essential that there is better cooperation between regional and local councils and central government particularly with regard to critical infrastructure. All of these things must happen urgently.I know that this Government and the Green Party which stands as a part of it is absolutely committed to making the changes that we need to in order to assure all New Zealanders that the water coming out of their taps is safe to drink. That is their fundamental right and it is our fundamental responsibility.
Peters WinstonRt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): That was a very illusory speech evincing care without any responsibility—an attempt to escape responsibility. This report is the perfect embodiment of neglect in the regions by the past Government and it shows.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Rubbish!Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: And it's no use screaming out that it's rubbish. I'll leave that specialty to you later; I'm talking about the report now. There is nothing more fundamental than the provision of clean drinking-water—a basic need of people. In fact the mayor of that area of course at the time they were making a complaint was scheming to be a candidate for the National Party which was overlooked today.The people of Havelock North have been badly let down and just launching a report as though that's an act of responsibility doesn't cut it in a democracy. What they experienced was reprehensible. It was a failure of leadership. It was a failure of governance agencies to ensure public safety and well-being and I think we all owe the panel that produced that report a lot for exposing what should have been known and had been forewarned for some considerable time. It was a failure to guard against complacency that led to contamination of drinking water and New Zealand First wants to place that on the record rather than let the former responsible Minister sitting on the other side get away with a performance like that.
Finlayson ChristopherHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National): Thank you. I join with Mr Parker in thanking the panel the Hon Lyn Stevens Dr Karen Poutasi and Anthony Wilson for their outstanding work. They have provided the thorough and robust report that I'd hoped for when I first approached them. They've served their country well.The National Opposition welcomes the recommendations and agrees they will substantially improve the safety of drinking water in Havelock North and the rest of this country which is why we as a Government went to the extent of setting up this inquiry. The previous Government carried out extensive work with Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) over water infrastructure and regulation. The National Infrastructure Plan had identified water infrastructure as the poorest performing sector across our infrastructure networks. As a result we worked with LGNZ to get agreement on the best regulatory model and spent a number of years on that. We agreed that this inquiry would be the vehicle to take that issue forward. The report highlights a quantum shift in how we should manage the state of our drinking water.This is an issue that is above politics; it's about doing what's right for residents and the new Government will have our support in any law changes required to implement the recommendations. The report addresses problems that have occurred over a number of years spanning both Governments but the important thing is that the recommendations are adopted as quickly as possible. Local councils around New Zealand will need to sit up as the Minister said and take notice of this. It's highlighted that the Havelock North contamination showed a series of risks that have been subsequently found in many other parts of this country.Once again we sympathise with the people of Havelock North who were so badly affected by the contamination and especially those who continue to deal with health problems related to the contamination. The incident severely affected the town's residents and I'm pleased the inquiry has comprehensively identified the cause of the outbreak as well as applied robust recommendations to prevent future outbreaks.As the Attorney-General said Part 23 of the report sets out a number of urgent and early recommendations the most significant of which is the proposal that a dedicated drinking-water regulator should be established early and promptly. There are a number of other urgent recommendations and as I have said the Opposition will support the Government on any law changes required to implement the recommendations.
Tuesday 5 December 2017 - Volume 726
12. Health System—Ministerial Advisory GroupDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour) to the Minister of HealthHealth System—Ministerial Advisory GroupDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Why has he appointed a ministerial advisory group on the health system?Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will have another go at asking the question.Dr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Why has he appointed a ministerial advisory group on the health system?Mr SPEAKER: No I want to advise the member that she has to read the yellow sheet or something which says the same thing.12. Dr LIZ CRAIG (Labour) to the Minister of Health: Why has he established the Ministerial Advisory Group on the Health System?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Health): Today I announced that I have established a ministerial advisory group because it has become increasingly clear to me that all is not well within our public health system. I require strong independent advice about how we can lift the ministry's performance and leadership to begin to address the challenges facing our health system and in particular to rebuild the relationships that were seriously strained under the previous Government.Dr Liz Craig: Thank you Mr Speaker. What does he expect the ministerial advisory group will do to improve New Zealand's health system?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I expect that the ministerial advisory group will provide the strategic advice required to deliver on this Government's commitments in health and ensure that the $8 billion we have committed to investing in health will make a positive difference in people's lives. This will include for example improving access to primary care by lowering the costs of visiting a GP.Dr Shane Reti: Isn't it more correct to say he's set up the ministerial advisory group to tell him what his health plan in health should be because he doesn't have a plan?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: No.Dr Liz Craig: Will the ministerial advisory group improve relationships across the health sector?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: One of the first things I expect the ministerial advisory group to do will be to rebuild relationships across the health sector. Strong and productive relationships are required to deliver the healthcare New Zealanders expect and deserve. I'm confident that the ministerial advisory group will be able to do this and I have no doubt that its members will be talking and listening to district health boards primary health organisations and others up and down the country.
9. Tertiary Education—Fees-free PolicyJAN TINETTI (Labour) to the Minister of EducationTertiary Education—Fees-free Policy9. JAN TINETTI (Labour) to the Minister of Education: Who will be eligible for fees-free tertiary education and training next year? [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: The Hon Chris Hipkins—with an additional question going to the Opposition.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Fees-free the flagship Government initiative that I launched with the Prime Minister at Aotea College this morning is available to students enrolled at funded providers who are New Zealand citizens or have been permanently resident in New Zealand for three years are studying at level 3 or above in a course that starts in 2018 and either are recent school leavers or have not previously undertaken more than half a year of study. If they meet those criteria they can receive a free year's study and students can check their eligibility at .Jan Tinetti: How many learners will benefit from fees-free?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The current estimates that I've been advised of are that there are around 76000 students eligible for fees-free next year and around 6000 apprentices and trainees. These students include around 31000 school leavers but a majority—44000—will be older students. An estimated 50000 learners will be in polytechnics wānanga private training establishments or industry training compared to around 30000 at university.Hon Paul Goldsmith: How many extra New Zealanders will start tertiary education next year as a result of the $380 million he plans to spend?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I hope that there will be a significant amount more. One of the things that make the exact estimates difficult is that forecasts for participation in tertiary education were to decline had we kept the previous policy position of the last Government by up to 2000 students a year. So our intention is to at least stabilise that and probably have an increase.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Is he aware that the slight decline in student numbers was a result of a demographic lowering of numbers in the cohort and secondly because there is an incredible jobs boom going on in this country employing more young New Zealanders? Is he aware of that and secondly exactly how many extra new students are we expecting next year?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Higher levels of employment don't necessarily mean that this policy is not going to benefit those people because as we have said we want to give people more opportunity to earn and learn at the same time which is why this policy also applies to people doing apprenticeships and other forms of on-the-job industry training.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why is paying more for people to gain an in-depth understanding of golf theory for example a priority for new spending?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I'm not aware of any golf courses that will be eligible for this. The eligibility for this is based on programmes that were approved and funded by the previous Government; so if those programmes are currently being funded I think the previous Government need take a good long hard look at themselves.
8. Fisheries Recreational—New Zealand Initiative ReportHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) to the Minister of FisheriesFisheries Recreational—New Zealand Initiative Report8. Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) to the Minister of Fisheries: Which recommendations if any of the New Zealand Initiative report The Future Catch does he intend to adopt and announce before Christmas?Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Fisheries): None.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does he at any point intend to accept the recommendation that all recreational marine fishers should be required to have a licence?Hon STUART NASH: No.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Will the Government announce that all water crafts supporting recreational fishers should be registered as craft over and above their trailers?Hon STUART NASH: No.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Are there any recommendations in the report The Future Catch that he does intend to implement?Hon STUART NASH: Certainly none before Christmas.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked if there were any he was going to introduce. The answer was none before Christmas." Well that's not really—Mr SPEAKER: The member knows very well he can't get a yes or no.Rino Tirikatene: What other examples are there of the Government listening to fishery stakeholders?Hon STUART NASH: Good question Mr Tirikatene. Since coming into Government I have announced a slow-down of the digital monitoring roll-out. It quickly became evident that the previous Government had not meaningfully consulted—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. The member's gone far enough to indicate to me that this does not flow at all from the primary question.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Are there any aspects of or recommendations in the report The Future Catch that the Minister is going to do some more work on and if so what are they?Hon STUART NASH: I have referred the report to my officials. I'll work through the report with my officials and the House and we'll wait and see what comes out of that.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does—[Interruption] Supplementary?Mr SPEAKER: Yeah. The member's got the lost one back again.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Thanks very much. Does he intend to announce that recreational sea fishers will have to record and report recreational catches?Hon STUART NASH: No."
3. Fiscal Strategy—Budget Policy StatementTAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of FinanceFiscal Strategy—Budget Policy Statement3. TAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of Finance: What are the main elements of the Budget Policy Statement that will be released on 14 December?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The Budget Policy Statement is a regular part of the financial cycle that sets out the broad fiscal parameters for the Budget and states the Government's priorities for the Budget. It also summarises the economic and fiscal forecasts that Treasury will set out in the half-year update to be released on the same day.Tamati Coffey: Will the Budget Policy Statement and the half-yearly update include further information about the Government's 100-day plan as outlined in the Speech from the Throne?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Yes it will. Excellent progress is being made on implementing the 100-day plan including today's announcement of the details of the first-year fees-free" programme by the Prime Minister and Minister Hipkins. The full costings of the 100-day plan commitments will be included in the half-year update including the families package the tertiary reforms and restarting contributions to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. The Budget Policy Statement will also set out the operating and capital spending allowances that will provide for the other commitments that the Government has made including the coalition and confidence and supply agreements.Tamati Coffey: Will the Budget Policy Statement have anything to say about how the Government intends to measure success in the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Why yes. While the member will have to wait until 14 December for details what I can say is that the Government intends to measure the success of our economy on more than just fiscal terms—as important as those are. We will measure our success on how we improve the well-being of New Zealanders how we reduce the rates of child poverty and how we improve sustainability. We will not try to claim success when more and more families are living in cars homelessness is the worst in the world and many of our schools and hospitals are ageing in disrepair unlike the previous Government tried to do."
1. Transport Infrastructure—Regional Rail NetworkDARROCH BALL (NZ First) to the Deputy Prime MinisterORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSTransport Infrastructure—Regional Rail Network1. DARROCH BALL (NZ First) to the Deputy Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements; if so why?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister): Yes because I can.Darroch Ball: Does he stand by his statements about the regenerating of regional rail; if so why? [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Yes and there will be one fewer question Mr Brownlee.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Most certainly. Regional rail will by the time we're finished once again become a core part of this country's transport infrastructure—Hon Steven Joyce: Ah yep. National did broadband; Winston does rail.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —after years and years of neglect. Mr Joyce in a democracy a man who can't listen can't lead. We know the hidden benefits—Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is simply this: what responsibility does the Deputy Prime Minister have for regional rail?Mr SPEAKER: I think that was possibly something that could have been brought up as part of when the question was asked. He is now halfway through answering it. The member didn't bring up at the first opportunity and I am going to allow the Minister to finish his answer.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is a serious point of order because although KiwiRail is meant to be a profit-running organisation—therefore a State-owned enterprise (SOE)—it's not under them but I am the Minister for it.Mr SPEAKER: Yes I think if that was the case—I think in future what we will do is we will be more careful about ensuring that questions are put down to the Minister for SOEs or the Minister for railways rather than to the Deputy Prime Minister Mr Ball.Darroch Ball: Does he stand by his commitment to boost regional economic development; if so why?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: In my role as Deputy Prime Minister—Hon Simon Bridges: Point of order Mr Speaker. Mr SPEAKER: No that's—I'm anticipating the point of order and if the Deputy Prime Minister can explain his ministerial responsibility as Deputy Prime Minister for this then we'll continue.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: In my role as Deputy Prime Minister it is my duty to ensure that the Government's programme is advanced and progressed and sometimes alas the Prime Minister has to be out of the country and it will become my primary role. That being the case yes we are flat-out ensuring that for the first time for a long time—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I think that might be in the category of a nice try".Darroch Ball: Does he stand by his commitment to boost employment; if so why?Mr SPEAKER: [Shakes head] Are there any further supplementary questions?"
Lubeck Marja; Rurawhe AdrianMARJA LUBECK (Labour): I'm rising to take the call on the Maritime Transport Amendment Bill. It's a real privilege to speak on this bill as it will support maritime safety and tackle pollution. This bill will increase the amount of compensation available to meet the costs of a major spill from an oil tanker in New Zealand waters. In the legislation as it currently stands there are limits on the amounts that the New Zealand Government can claim back in case of an environmental disaster as we saw with the Rena in 2011. The result of that will be that the taxpayer in the end pays to clean up the mess. The limitation of liability under the international convention prevented the New Zealand Government at the time—The CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for me to report progress.House resumed.Progress reported.Report adopted.The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.
Scott AlastairALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): Thank you Mr Chair. A brief call to highlight some of the points that the Minister was making—talking about following an incident testing after the incident. Now Minister isn't that just too late? Isn't it better to have a culture where people understand that there is going to be random drug-testing. It's a bit like saying Well we won't bother with having police check for alcohol randomly. We'll only do it after there's been an accident on State Highway 2 and see what happened and what occurred." That's exactly what—you're taking away the disincentive or the incentive to misbehave.So my question to you Minister is: isn't it similar to random alcohol-testing that we have every day and everyone accepts as being normal and is a disincentive to take alcohol and drive? Similarly a drug and alcohol management plan or random drug-testing are an incentive to not take drugs and operate machinery large vessels safety-sensitive—I think the term is—machinery. So I think you are Minister being soft on the fact that you'll go in only after the event. The event is done the damage has occurred and it gives some licence to those—not everyone of course but it does allow people to think that they can get away with it by taking on drugs and alcohol when they're in positions of responsibility. So I'd like you to comment on the analogy between what I've just highlighted: the random alcohol-testing that we have on our roads is OK by you Minister I assume but it's not OK on ships."
Dyson Ruth; Rurawhe AdrianMARITIME TRANSPORT AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeHon RUTH DYSON (Senior Whip—Labour): I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question.The CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Leave has been sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
Trusts Bill — First Reading
Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you very much Mr Assistant Speaker. It's a pleasure to take the call on the Trusts Bill. I feel entrusted in taking the call on the Trusts Bill as we discuss a bill that is to replace the Trustee Act 1956 and the Perpetuities Act 1964—so it was quite some time ago according to those dates that this legislation was last reviewed. This is one of those bills that come up every now and then where there is a need to update and a need to ensure that these pieces of legislation that impact on everyone's lives in our society reflect the changing times in our community. Today amidst Labour's first 100 days we're doing just that. This piece of legislation has been in the process for a number of years. A Law Commission report was issued in 2009. It was then that a draft trust bill was released for public consultation. People were able to have their say and as previous speakers have noted people have had their say and now we have the bill that we're debating here tonight. So it's good to see that this piece of legislation is going through. As has been noted there are 300000 to 500000 trusts in this country and I think this shows the impact this legislation will have on people up and down our country. I think it's also an example of good lawmaking process. I've heard members of the Government say Why has this been sitting on the Order Paper?" Well it shows that we've taken the time to consult and taken the time to go out there and now we see this new Government feeling like this is a top priority to put through in their hundred days. Well I'm not sure but I don't know whether New Zealanders can trust them to deliver on their promises if we're delivering on this piece of legislation in their top 100 days. So it's a good piece of legislation. It's a well-thought-through piece of legislation. It delivers good policy objectives. It makes changes that are needed and necessary. It provides an 18-month transitional period for those changes in order for trusts to look at them and to make appropriate changes to their constitutions. So I commend this bill to the House. Thank you very much."
Hipango HareteHARETE HIPANGO (National—Whanganui): E Te Mana Whakawā tēnā koe. I'm entrusted to speak this evening in relation to a proposed piece of legislation introduced by Hon Amy Adams. I put it to the House that this is a worthy piece of proposed legislation introduced on 1 August 2017. It will replace the Trustee Act 1956 and the Perpetuities Act 1964 legislation that has been complex and over the last 60 years—now is the time to contemplate seriously with the first reading of this piece of legislation putting it into law.So in addressing matters before I commend this bill to the House it is a piece of proposed legislation—a bill—that will make trust law more accessible to everyday New Zealanders. This is an excellent piece of legislation proposed by the Hon Amy Adams and as a practising lawyer of many years it's a pleasure to be able to speak and address the House in support of this bill.Trusts are an essential part of our legal system with around 300000 to 500000 trusts operating in New Zealand Aotearoa today. In fact many of us here in the House and those who may be listening to the addresses being made this evening will have had the experience of serving either as trustees or as beneficiaries of trusts. Ordinary New Zealanders use trusts on a daily basis to manage their finances and trusts form the economic backbone of the commercial and social sectors.Our current trust law as I addressed is unnecessarily complex and difficult to navigate. This bill will seek to simplify matters ensuring that trust law is more practical usable and cost effective so that families and businesses can manage their affairs with confidence. Under this bill the guidelines and the clauses within the bill will provide guidance—much better guidance—for trustees and beneficiaries to make it easier to resolve disputes. This is an update of our trust law that is long overdue—as I referenced 60 years. So the proposed reforms will seek to clarify simplify core trust principles and make the legislation more useful fixing practical problems and reducing costs. The reforms will ensure trust law is better suited to the needs of New Zealanders.In conclusion I simply say that much has been addressed before the House this evening. I defer to my senior colleague the Hon Christopher Finlayson QC who has gone through and actually identified on his study of the proposed legislation that there is still much that will need to be addressed by the select committee in terms of the detail. That is something that I've not turned my mind or my eyes to but in conclusion this evening I simply say that this is a worthy bill it is a trustworthy bill and I commend the Trusts Bill to the House. Kia ora.
King MattMATT KING (National—Northland): It is a pleasure again to take a call on this bill. Isn't it great to see another excellent piece of legislation from the Hon Amy Adams. We're confident it's such a great piece of legislation. Why else would the new Government have made it a part of their 100-day agenda? They've run out of ideas—40 days into a 100-day programme and this Parliament has passed five pieces of legislation: two of these members' bills turned into Government bills one passed under urgency on its third time round. Two of these are National Party members' bills and one is a former National Government bill.The only bills on the Order Paper are former National Government bills and members' bills. I had a look through the Order Paper: the Autonomous Sanctions Bill—we've done the Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Bill the Legislation Bill—the Electronic Interactions Reform Bill the Maritime Crimes Amendment Bill the Maritime Transport Amendment Bill—Hon Tracey Martin: Try reading this bill.MATT KING: Tracey Martin keep it down over there. The Hon Gerry Brownlee offered today in the House to fast track—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! The member needs to come to the bill that we're discussing.MATT KING: I'm coming to it. The Hon Gerry Brownlee—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): No no. You'll come to it now. Thank you.MATT KING: OK. He offered to fast track this legislation. We supported it all to save the House the time and the expense. But hello! The coalition Government objected. We're glad they support our programme but we can think of some more urgent legislation to bring on to the Order Paper. Let's debate Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill and unlock the billions of dollars of potential Māori land—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! I've asked you once and I'm asking you again. You need to come to the bill that we're discussing the Trusts Bill. OK? Kia ora.MATT KING: OK. I'll wrap it up. Not only did we leave this country in a strong position—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! Sit down. No it's not permission for you to continue with the narrative that you want to. You either speak to the bill or you resume your seat.MATT KING: I won't waste any more time. I commend this bill to the House.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I call Tamati Coffey—five minutes.
Falloon AndrewANDREW FALLOON (National—Rangitata): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise to speak on the first reading of the Trusts Bill in the name of Andrew Little. I'd like to commend the Minister for bringing the bill to the House following in the footsteps set down by his predecessor Amy Adams who is responsible for this excellent piece of legislation.I'd also like to just take a moment to commend Andrew Little for a moment because I don't believe he's been given the due regard that he is due in respect of the election result. He took on a—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! The member needs to come back to the bill.ANDREW FALLOON: I apologise. I will just beg your indulgence briefly to say that a large part of it was due to—Hon Tracey Martin: No no you don't trifle with the Chair.ANDREW FALLOON: Fair enough. Similar to the previous bill we debated the Legislation Bill the Trusts Bill also seeks to make legislation more accessible to the general public which is a very laudable and important goal. The bill replaces two Acts the Trustee Act and the Perpetuities Act and is the most significant update to trust legislation in the last six decades. The changes the bill makes are largely based on the recommendations of the Law Commission. They found much of existing trust law exists in a considerable body of case law and this updated legislation will set out those principles in the new Act.This is a worthy bill. It is another example of good housekeeping that Parliament must attend to from time to time though I note that time usually is late on a Wednesday night in the middle of winter rather than as one of the first Acts of a new Government. Regardless National will support this bill. I look forward to hearing submissions on it as part of the Justice Committee and I commend it to the House. Thank you.
Bishop ChrisCHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. So the Trusts Bill—the Trusts Bill. After five long years of work by the Law Commission on this most profound and exciting area of law—300000 to 500000 trusts in New Zealand—we come to the Trusts Bill in the middle of the 100 days of inaction".Hon Member: Week four.CHRIS BISHOP: Week four. We're sitting in here on a Tuesday night and we've got 2½ three weeks to go until Christmas and this exciting reformist progressive Government that's going to make bold and exciting changes to New Zealand law has put before us the Trusts Bill which is a bill that is literally eight years in the gestation.To be fair in contrast to other pieces of legislation that this Government's put before the Parliament at least this bill has been through the proper process because you couldn't say that this bill hasn't been through a process. It was referred to the Law Commission we had a five-year inquiry and every QC and every trust lawyer in the country made a submission. The Law Commission would have done their various drafts and they would have put out an exposure thing and then they would have had the submissions and they would have had a final review. Then we had an exposure draft of the legislation under the previous Government under Amy Adams and Judith Collins as Ministers of Justice and then we had the introduction of the bill and the bill sat on the Order Paper for about a year. Now in the middle of the 100-day action plan we're getting on with it—we're getting on with the Trusts Bill! Well what an exciting day for the Parliament. What an exciting day for this new Government.Let's go through what we've passed: the Trusts Bill that's exciting; we've passed the Private International Law (Choice of Law in Tort) Bill that's very exciting—Andrew Falloon: Births deaths and marriages.CHRIS BISHOP: Oh the Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Bill Andrew Falloon says—another very important bill; the Subordinate Legislation Confirmation and Validation Bill—now Act—a very important piece of legislationThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! Can you come back to the bill.CHRIS BISHOP: Coming back to the point sir. Thank you sir. So we've had a lot of exciting bills. I can't wait for the Maritime Crimes Amendment Bill at number six on the Order Paper; that's a classic. I can't wait for the Maritime Transport Amendment Bill—that's going to be a cracker—and then the Military Justice Amendment Bill in Ron Mark's name. That could be Ron Mark's first bill. It could be his first Government bill. Well Ron Mark's going to get very excited about that. I personally can't wait.This is a good bill. It was introduced by the previous Government and it just continues a long line of legislation. Maybe one day maybe tomorrow this Government will finally get on with its own business. I commend this bill to the House."
Legislation Bill — First Reading
Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a pleasure to rise in support of this bill the Legislation Bill—something of a tautology. I think that speaking on it is probably my punishment for referring last week to the fact that we live in a global world. At the risk of personalising my contribution unduly I would note that I can think of perhaps four categories of New Zealanders who might benefit from this bill: first law students; second lawyers; third parliamentarians and other lawmakers; and fourth all those affected by the laws of this land. I note that I have been at some point or another or indeed currently in all of those four categories so it seems very important to me.In mechanical terms of course the legislation repeals the Legislation Act 2012 and updates the Interpretation Act 1999 and in addition to the learned contributions being made already on the legislation on both sides of the House I would just add with particular emphasis some notes on the accessibility. It seems to me and again it has already been noted that access to the law is a crucial aspect of the rule of law so I'll speak briefly on the subjects of cost clarity consistency and the comprehensive nature of the legislation that will result from this legislation.First as to cost obviously there are aspects of time and also money in terms of cost. The money aspect is neutral in that most rules are available online and that will remain so but the cost in terms of time to New Zealand's private citizens businesses NGOs and the like will be considerable—the saving of time that this bill will allow in the sense that it brings together in a single place many rules regulations; indeed all manner of secondary legislation. It is very valuable in that sense on the cost aspect.As to clarity the disclosure elements in Part 4 it seems to me will add considerable clarity to the way that such secondary legislation is made. On the subject of consistency I note that it will apply to all manner of secondary legislation and indeed the way that that is made. Fourth and finally comprehensive in nature obviously means the fact that it's all in one place and others have already spoken on that so I won't labour that point further.Given that there are as has already been stated over 100 different sources of secondary legislation it's helpful that we will have a one-stop shop so to speak. I'm reminded of that phrase: sometimes you don't know what you don't know—or one doesn't know what one doesn't know Madam Deputy Speaker. So it's valuable in that sense too. So for all those reasons I commend the bill to this House.
Lee DeniseDENISE LEE (National—Maungakiekie): I wish to congratulate you on your new role—my first time to be able to do so—Madam Deputy Speaker.I'm privileged to take a call on this first reading of the aptly named Legislation Bill. I commend the first reading and its passage forward and I'd like to highlight one main provision as many other speakers have done so before me. It's a practical provision and it's currently that there's no single place where individuals and businesses can see all of New Zealand's secondary legislation. It's pretty remiss of us when more than 100 Government agencies can draft and make secondary legislation and it's not generally published on the New Zealand Legislation website. On a very practical note if you have access then authorities have increased ability to enforce regulatory regimes.These changes will create ease of publishing and presenting legislation. Publishing and presenting legislation—a lesson the Government could take on board because they appear not to be publishing and presenting much of their own legislation at the moment.I'm delighted to commend the bill at this stage. After all its origins sit with us and I symbolically turn to my right to congratulate the Hon Chris Finlayson. Thank you.