edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
10. Question No. 10—Building and ConstructionPAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai) to the Minister for Building and ConstructionQuestion No. 10—Building and Construction10. PAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai) to the Minister for Building and Construction: What recent reports has the Minister seen regarding the Construction Skills Action Plan?Hon POTO WILLIAMS (Minister for Building and Construction): I've seen reports that the Construction Skills Action Plan which addresses skills and labour shortages in the construction industry has delivered early and indeed more than doubled our target of supporting a further 4000 people into construction-related education and employment. Since the plan was launched in 2018 more than 9300 people have taken up education or employment opportunities in the construction sector through various Government initiatives. Our building sector has a big job ahead of it and the success of the action plan is another example of this Government supporting the sector to deliver for New Zealand.Paul Eagle: How has the Construction Skills Action Plan surpassed its target?Hon POTO WILLIAMS: The plan was a three-year programme of work that was expected to deliver by October 2021. However thanks to a strong performance of programmes within the plan like Mana in Mahi which has placed over 2200 people in the construction sector; skills for industry supporting another 1600; and growing careers and credentials another 5200 we are exceeding our targets and delivering for the sector.Paul Eagle: How has the building sector responded to Government initiatives like the Construction Skills Action Plan?Hon POTO WILLIAMS: We're already seeing the building and construction sector respond. Statistics New Zealand data has shown strong growth in the sector despite COVID-19. The most recent household labour force survey shows an annual increase of 21000 employed in the construction industry. It's also encouraging to note that 5800 of this increase are women.
8. Question No. 8—EducationMARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 8—Education8. MARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What action is the Government taking to support Auckland schools to provide learning environments for their students that are warm comfortable and fit for purpose?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Three Auckland schools in urgent need of an upgrade are benefiting as part of the Government's $1.3 billion nationwide school redevelopment programme. May Road School Onehunga Primary School and Albany Primary School are getting new classrooms to replace those in poor condition and they will benefit from investments in projects to support expected increases in student numbers.Hon Priyanca Radhakrishnan: What assistance is Onehunga Primary School receiving?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: A very good question. Onehunga Primary School in desperate need of further teaching space is getting a new three-level block with 14 teaching spaces a library and an admin space that includes four new roll growth classrooms at a budget of $14.5 million with construction getting under way this year.Hon Michael Wood: What assistance is May Road School receiving?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Another excellent question. May Road School is benefiting from a $9 million investment to build a three-storey 15-classroom block including eight roll growth classrooms and seven redeveloped classrooms new car parks and a safe drop-off and pick-up area for its years 1 to 4 students. Construction is expected to get under way next year.Marja Lubeck: What assistance is Albany Primary School receiving?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Albany Primary School in Auckland's North Shore will receive 20 new classrooms to replace ageing facilities and to cater for growing student numbers—[Interruption] They don't seem to like the new classrooms on the other side. Eight of these new classrooms are roll growth classrooms. [Interruption]SPEAKER: Order! Order!Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The project's in its early planning stages. The time frames for that one are still to be finalised.SPEAKER: There are a lot of questions coming from there. Does anyone want to stand up and ask one? Apparently not.
7. Question No. 7—EducationHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 7—Education7. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Education: How many schools if any had fewer than 20 percent of their students attend regularly in 2020 using the Ministry of Education's definition of regular attendance?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): I'm advised that in 2020 12 primary schools and five secondary schools had fewer than 20 percent of their students attending 90 percent of the time which is the ministry's definition of regular attendance.Hon Paul Goldsmith: How is it possible that 17 schools in this country have fewer than one in five of their students attending regularly?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In preparation for the member's question I asked for a list of all of the schools that fit that category. In terms of primary schools by and large those primary schools are all reasonably small primary schools. Therefore it only takes a small number of students to be away more than 10 percent of the time for them to fall into the category that the member has mentioned. In terms of the secondary schools I would note that there are fewer secondary schools in that category in 2020 than there were in 2017 when that member was in Government.Hon Paul Goldsmith: How many attendance officers do we have across the country to deal with the large number of truant children?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: About the same number that there were when that member was in Government.Hon Paul Goldsmith: What does it say about the Government's priorities in education that it allowed there to be just one attendance officer covering 80 schools in West Auckland in the middle of last year?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I would refer the member back to the reorganisation of the Attendance Service undertaken by the last Government in 2015 which determined where the attendance resources were located and under contracts signed by his Government.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has he considered changing his first priority in the National Education and Learning Priorities from Ensure places of learning are safe inclusive and free from racism discrimination and bullying" to ensuring the kids are at school?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Of course the people who ultimately determine whether kids go to school or not are their parents.Marja Lubeck: What additional support has the Government provided to support student attendance?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Following COVID-19 the Government set aside the Urgent Response Fund to help schools to reengage students with their learning including to address the attendance challenges that have been evident and growing over some time. The Budget also provided an additional $2.5 million for the Attendance Service—one of the first increases for some time—to ensure that there are more people working with those who are at risk of disengaging or who have become unenrolled."
6. Question No. 6—Social Development and EmploymentANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development and EmploymentQuestion No. 6—Social Development and Employment6. ANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What reports has she seen on the number of people receiving financial assistance from MSD? Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development and Employment): The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) released the March quarter benefit report today and it shows 32880 people exited the benefit and moved into work this year. This number is the largest number of people moving into work since electronic records began in 1996. The previous biggest quarter was March 2000. Today's figures also show a fall of 23563 from the previous quarter. There are now 365937 people receiving a main benefit in New Zealand much lower than most pundits predicted. This Government is committed to getting people into work and today's figures show the interventions we have made through the COVID-19 crisis are working. Angie Warren-Clark: How do these statistics relate to seasonal trends? Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The fall is in line with the trend we generally see in the March quarter. However signs are encouraging with 10670 more people moving off benefit than in the same period in 2019. The statistics for the next quarter will provide us with a more complete insight but indications are positive. This positivity is reflected in the latest Jobs Online data which shows vacancies increased 73.7 percent compared to a year earlier. Vacancies are up across all industries with most growth being seen in healthcare manufacturing construction and hospitality. Angie Warren-Clark: What interventions did the Government make to get people into work? Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: We know that the longer people remain on a benefit the more difficult it becomes for them to re-enter the labour market so early interventions are vital. That's why the Government invested in the wage subsidy to keep people in work and invested an additional $150 million to increase MSD's employment and financial services as part of our COVID-19 recovery package. We've continued to invest in employment outcomes along the way with additional funding for Flexi-wage and bespoke interventions such as Apprenticeship Boost Mana in Mahi and He Poutama Rangatahi.
3. Question No. 3—Research Science and InnovationWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland) to the Minister of Research Science and InnovationQuestion No. 3—Research Science and Innovation3. WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland) to the Minister of Research Science and Innovation: What recent announcements has she made about strengthening Māori knowledge in science and innovation?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Research Science and Innovation): Last week I announced the 16 projects receiving a total of $3.9 million in funding from the 2021 round of the Vision Mātauranga Capability Fund each of which will strengthen Māori knowledge capabilities skills and networks in the science and innovation system. Supporting our Māori researchers is essential for the aspirations of individuals whānau Māori communities Māori organisations and New Zealand and this Government is proud to stand in support of these projects.Willow-Jean Prime: What are some of the successful projects?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: With $250000 of funding from the fund Manaaki Whenua will partner with the Ngāi Tahu Māori Rock Art Trust to investigate the ecology of the 14 nationally culturally significant rock art sites around Ōpihi in South Canterbury to tell us more about tīpuna and our past. Te Ruapekapeka Trust and the Victoria University of Wellington will also receive $250000 to digitally construct aspects of the Ruapekapeka heritage pā site using virtual reality technology.Willow-Jean Prime: Why is it important that we support a kaupapa Māori approach to research science and innovation?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: A kaupapa Māori approach to research development and innovation will see impact and growth within iwi and Māori organisations as well as strengthening science and innovation for all New Zealanders. Ensuring cultural knowledge is maintained protected and still owned by Māori and iwi will also preserve the uniqueness of Aotearoa and the richness of our cultural heritage.
2. Question No. 2—Prime MinisterDr SHANE RETI (Deputy Leader—National) to the Prime MinisterQuestion No. 2—Prime Minister2. Dr SHANE RETI (Deputy Leader—National) to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all of her Government's statements and actions?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes. In particular I stand by the Government's response to COVID-19 that has meant a record number of people have moved off a benefit and into employment in the March quarter with 32880 people moving into work in the first three months of 2021. I'm sure the Minister for Social Development and Employment will have more to say about this matter.Dr Shane Reti: Have any DHBs been advised that they will be consolidated as part of her Government's proposed health sector restructuring and if so which?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As the member knows a question as detailed as that is best directed towards the Minister of Health. What I can say is the Government is working through the recommendations of the Health and Disability System Review and we'll have more to say about the future of the health system in the coming weeks. Dr Shane Reti: Has Cabinet and Treasury signed off on the cost for the proposed health sector restructuring and if so what is the estimated cost?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The member will be aware that matters that are pertaining to the Budget are Budget confidential until Budget day. Clearly the full costs of an overall review of the health system are expensive. But the member will need to wait until Budget day to see some of what the Government plans to do.Dr Shane Reti: Has she been advised by Dr Ashley Bloomfield about any risks a restructuring of the Ministry of Health may have for our coronavirus response?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On behalf of the Prime Minister I regularly meet and talk with Dr Bloomfield. My Minister of Health is the person primarily dealing with the restructuring process but I am not aware of any such concerns.Dr Shane Reti: Will she delay any health sector restructuring for at least two years given the health sector is currently focused on rolling out the coronavirus vaccine across the entire country?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On behalf of the Prime Minister I have a great deal of confidence in our health system to be able to continue New Zealand's strong response to COVID-19 as well as getting on with the job of making sure we have improved health services right across New Zealand.Dr Shane Reti: Will she apologise to the managed isolation and quarantine worker she accosted in this House yesterday given she has since stated the Government is partly to blame?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I utterly reject the word used in that question. The Prime Minister has already spoken today about the fact that the language she used yesterday may have been a little bit blunt. But the facts that lie behind it remain the same.
1. Question No. 1—FinanceDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of FinanceORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Finance1. Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): According to Statistics New Zealand electronic card transactions were up in March compared to the previous quarter showing that New Zealanders are continuing to show confidence in the economy. This was better than expectations given the increased alert levels in the earlier part of the month. Responding to the Statistics New Zealand report the ANZ Bank noted that there were several pluses on the retail spending front including the improved balance sheet position of households high levels of employment and low interest rates.Dr Duncan Webb: What reports has he seen on Government support for the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Last month when Auckland went into alert level 3 for a week the Government provided a wage subsidy to help affected businesses. I can inform the House today that 52272 applications were approved for the wage subsidy and more than $178 million was paid out to those businesses.Dr Duncan Webb: What other support has been provided to businesses during recent COVID resurgences?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Government created the Resurgence Support Payment to assist businesses with one-off costs during alert level rises. Taking into account both the increased alert level events this year 79384 applications were received and just over $198 million was paid out with roughly 75 percent of that going to the Auckland region. While we in New Zealand enjoy a relatively normal way of life compared to our friends overseas we do know that this can change quickly and the Government remains ready to support businesses and workers should alert levels have to increase again.
Clark DavidInstruction to the Economic Development Science and Innovation CommitteeHon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): I move That the Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Bill be reported to the House four months and one day after it had its first reading.
Smith StuartSTUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura): Thank you Mr Speaker. It is a pleasure to speak on the Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. I think there's been some interesting points made across the House particularly from the ACT member about regulation and so on. I take the point—he made quite a few points about the emissions trading scheme. Then we heard the chief whip over there from the Labour Party saying that we won't get to net zero by 2050 without this bill. I can assure the member that we will because it really has little to do with that at all.We do support this bill. We do share some of the concerns that the ACT Party speaker raised about whether this is the most efficient way to report on these things. I would have thought actually that it's in businesses' interests to report on this and do a damn good job of it because actually their investors are looking for that. People are looking for a lead on these things. They want to know that the companies that they use for goods and services—in this case banks insurance companies and so on—are reflecting their own views. We know that most of New Zealanders or the vast majority of New Zealanders want to get to net zero by 2050 and they want to deal with companies that also want to do that. So having a system in place where we can be assured that we're dealing with companies who actually are doing what they say they are is a good thing. So we don't dispute that at all. But we have to do that in a way that's the most efficient manner for the companies as well because we don't want to foist more unnecessary costs on them; we want it to be easy to work with. That's something that will be all teased out through the select committee process. I do wonder—it does make me scratch my head a bit that it's going to the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee. All due respect to the members of that committee; however the Finance and Expenditure Committee would have been a more natural home for a matter such as this to be considered. Like the member from Dunedin—I come from the South as well but not quite that far south. But Rachel Brooking was saying that she's on the Environment Committee. So am I but I don't think we're the right committee to have a bill like this—albeit that some people sit on both. But that committee is focused on the environment and this is while it's got an environmental focus actually a finance bill. This is about reporting for large companies. We're talking about large companies here with assets of a billion dollars or more or in the case of insurance companies with revenue of more than $250 million. They will have very good processes in place already for all of their reporting and recording. What they want and they've already expressed this view is a standard that is well-known and everybody sticks to it. I think that's a great thing. As we say on this side we're just a little bit concerned and we'll find out in the select committee that this is the best way to achieve that goal. So it's with that in mind that I commend the bill to the House.
Brooking RachelRACHEL BROOKING (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. Like the former speaker Kieran McAnulty I'm very happy to rise in support of the Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. I'm very pleased to be the third member based in Dunedin to do so today. Perhaps I'm not as passionate about markets as the other two members from Dunedin who spoke before me but I am very passionate about climate change and very focused on addressing climate change both the adaptation piece and the mitigation piece and this bill tries to do a bit of both.So I also agree with both of my colleagues from the beautiful Dunedin that the standards set by the External Reporting Board (XRB) need to lead to disclosure and reporting that is clear consistent and comparable. I hope that at the select committee there will be some expansion on identifying what the risks and opportunities are that are relevant to setting these standards.I just want to note one other thing and that is that under the Financial Reporting Act the External Reporting Board—that XRB—is a Crown entity. It's independent and it states that there's to be four to nine members with knowledge of things like business accounting auditing finance economics or—always very important—law. Now there's an addition here to add expertise in sustainable development and I think that's a very fine idea.So there's been some discussion as well about what select committee this bill will be sent to. I sit on the Environment Committee and am sad that it's not going to come to us but I'm sure the select committee will get very thorough and thoughtful submissions on what is a very important and world-leading piece of legislation. So I commend the bill to the House.
McAnulty KieranKIERAN McANULTY (Labour—Wairarapa): Thank you very much Mr Speaker. It's important that every part of the New Zealand economy plays its part in addressing climate change and doing what we need to do as a country and an economy to get to that point. And I think it's a matter of pride actually for this country to be a world leader in this regard. I support this bill. I think it's a good idea.I have heard the concerns that have been raised particularly by the member from the ACT Party Damien Smith that this is simply more regulation and won't lead to achieving our goals. I would say that that is another example of saying Yes we need to do something about climate change." and then when the opportunity arises opposing it. This will lead to providing the information not only to businesses but also consumers and investors into who's actually doing their bit and what businesses need to do to do their bit. I mean we will never get to a net zero carbon future by 2050 if we don't bring in measures like this.So on that basis a very simple point that this is going to create a market that is fully informed. And it will be beneficial to businesses because I guarantee that this requirement will highlight areas where they can improve and become more efficient that they hadn't identified themselves. Therefore I'm very happy to commend this bill to the House."
Bennett Glen; Rurawhe AdrianGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth): Thank you Mr Speaker. Thank you and I'm glad to be taking a call this afternoon on the Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. Last year in December this House declared a climate emergency. And with that declaration we are needing to change and I'm glad that many individuals businesses and communities are changing but action from this House is required for us to achieve our aims by 2050.So I'm proud to be standing in support of this piece of legislation and being one of the first countries in the world as the Hon James Shaw said to introduce laws requiring us to disclose the impacts of climate change on businesses—both the risks and also the opportunities. I want to thank the Hon Dr David Clark for his work and following on from the Hon James Shaw thank you for your work in this space and we look forward to taking it to the next stage. I commend this bill to the House.DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call. I call Nicola Willis—five minutes.
Smith DamienDAMIEN SMITH (ACT): Thank you. This omnibus bill will amend the Financial Markets Conduct Act Financial Reporting Act and the Public Audit Act 2001 but it is a very single broad policy to broaden non-financial reporting by requiring and supporting climate-related disclosures and it's mandatory. This bill will have no impact on reducing emissions or meeting our international climate change commitments but will increase costs to business. In New Zealand we already have an emissions trading scheme (ETS) and a Climate Change Commission to set up a plan to meet our international climate change obligations. Increasing bureaucracy on companies the 200 or so organisations will make no difference. It will not lead to smarter more efficient capital being deployed and it won't help the smooth transition to a more sustainable low-emissions scheme.The emissions trading scheme is the most efficient and first way to achieve carbon reductions and increasing regulation will in fact make meeting our climate change obligations harder. The Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs has produced a world-class press release but this is not world-class law—or it's not a world-class bill. Minter Ellison the law firm also asks: why is this not also applying to Government departments Crown and local authorities who should also be legally obliged to follow the new climate-related financial disclosures? Simply an expectation that they disclose in line with the law is not good enough in their view given Government departments Crown and local authority entities may compete with listed entities. It's very important there's a level playing field and they have at least strict requirements. Further many such entities are major emissions producers and polluters and yet there is no mechanism to address that.From ACT's point of view the bill simply addresses another layer of bureaucracy imposes costs and all while the Climate Commission is also coming up with its final recommendations. So how does this all fit together? It won't reduce climate emissions. It will increase the amount of reporting. Think about all the wasted paper and trees that's going to occur for a bill that won't do anything. SkyCity Entertainment as an example suggests that to do this high-level report they've had an indicative cost of around $1 million that they believe could be spent on sustainability issues. And as importantly it could also affect loans to farmers and horticultural players across the agritech sector because the banks will not lend in the normal fashion to these organisations.For the reasons that we've suggested there's no impact on reducing emissions. It brings a layer of bureaucracy and cost and capital distortion to the New Zealand market and even though we have global names being mentioned today we at the ACT Party want to look after New Zealanders. We have the ETS climate set-up to meet these obligations and we must insist on a trading playing field for Government entities versus listed entities as a non-negotiable aspect. For that reason the ACT Party will be opposing this bill at introduction.
van Velden BrookeBROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of ACT in support of this motion which is about the appropriations for the Officers of Parliament. Like Matt Doocey before I have the privilege of sitting in on and attending the Officers of Parliament Committee and I think that now more than ever we need transparency for the public's faith in our democracy. I think that is the strength that the Auditor-General's and the Ombudsman's offices have for our democracy. When we see things like the Government's actions to do with managed isolation and quarantine and the border that's where the Auditor-General steps in and I think we need to see more of that. I think we will be seeing more members of the public raising issues with how the Government has managed the borders vaccinations and a whole range of Government actions and I think the Ombudsman's office will be highly utilised. Therefore I rise in support of transparency and for faith in our democracy. Thank you Madam Speaker.Motion agreed and Address agreed to.
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. As the National member of Parliament on the Officers of Parliament Committee I stand in support of this motion. I just want to challenge one Chris Bishop who raised the importance of the Regulations Review Committee which I must say compared to the Officers of Parliament Committee pales in significance.Hon Chris Hipkins: I'm off—I can't cope!MATT DOOCEY: It is Thursday by the way. As the Minister outlined to maintain the independence of the Officers of Parliament the Public Finance Act 1989 provides for funding for the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General the Office of the Ombudsmen and the Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and this is to be determined by Parliament through the Officers of Parliament Committee which we are debating today.We received submissions from each office for the proposed alterations to their 2020-21 appropriations and their draft budgets for 2021 and 2022. For the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General it was very clear that COVID had disrupted the Auditor-General's work programme. The alterations that we are debating today in this motion allow for the transfers to the 2021-22 budget for the Auditor-General to conduct and continue this work.For the Office of the Ombudsmen we support the transfer between budgets 2020-21 to 2021-22 due to the impact of COVID on these officers and their work plan as well. For the Office of the Ombudsmen I'd also like to acknowledge the work that they are undertaking have undertaken and will undertake in the future with these budgets into the 32 managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) facilities that the Government has set up in response to COVID. The Office of the Ombudsmen goes in and inspects these MIQ facilities. We support their bid for increased funding to continue the great work they do.Finally for the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment we support their increased funding to allow the commission to secure suitable permanent accommodation. Thank you very much.
Hipkins ChrisOFFICES OF PARLIAMENTAddress to Governor-GeneralHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That a respectful Address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor-General commending to Her Excellency the alterations to the appropriations for the 2020-21 financial year in respect of Vote Audit Vote Ombudsmen and Vote Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and the estimates of expenses and capital injection for the 2021-22 financial year in respect of Vote Audit Vote Ombudsmen and Vote Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment.This is an annual event that the Parliament goes through. It concerns the appropriations for our three Officers of Parliament: the Controller and Auditor-General the Ombudsmen and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. It sets out any alterations to their appropriations for the current year. This for every other Government entity is done through Supplementary Estimates. Officers of Parliament are subject to a different process—this process and I'll talk a little bit more about that in a moment. And it also sets out the main appropriations that will be included in the main Appropriation Bill that the Minister of Finance will introduce on Budget day. The process maintains the independence of the Officers of Parliament. It is not the Government that sets the budget or that agrees to the alterations to that budget for these entities; it is the Parliament as a whole. And that is what this motion is all about: maintaining the independence.The proposals in the address have been examined by the Officers of Parliament Committee which has the Speaker as its chairperson. The committee's report explains the detail and it examines the issues behind the numbers proposed in the Address. It includes the fact that the Auditor-General is needing to retain skilled staff and deal with some remuneration issues there. It increases funding for the Ombudsmen in order to allow for them to inspect managed isolation and quarantine facilities and deal with complaints relating to COVID-19 and deal with security requirements from a significant increase in threatening approaches from aggrieved complainants. And with regard to the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment it addresses their main cost pressure which is the need to find new premises.
van Velden BrookeBROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. The ACT Party joins in supporting the approval of these orders. Last time we approved orders under this act it was 9 March and I note that today we're debating the—they all look the same from here—the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Maritime Border) Order (No 2) Amendment Order 2021 and the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Alert Level Requirements) Order (No 6) 2021 moving Auckland to level 1. I note that the changes made that the Minister for COVID-19 Response has already outlined are quite simple. They're about face masks face coverings QR codes for businesses and public transport they're also about exemptions to the orders. I would just leave it quite simply and say that our mantra throughout this entire period of COVID19 has always been to make constructive criticism where necessary helpful suggestions where possible and ask the questions that New Zealanders need answered. We will continue to monitor how the Government makes its orders and gives notice.So in summary ACT supports this order and we will remain constructive in the critique of the Government when they're making orders. Thank you.
Genter Julie AnneHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green): The Green Party supports these orders.
Bishop ChrisCHRIS BISHOP (National): I just only really want to say to the House that we support the scrutiny of these orders and we don't have any problem with the orders as promulgated by the Minister and we thank the Regulations Review Committee for their work. If I was less tired and in a more jolly mood I would make a series of jokes now about the Regulations Review Committee.Hon Members: Go on!CHRIS BISHOP: Well no they're just—Hon Member: It's Thursday.CHRIS BISHOP: Well that is true; it is a Thursday.Hon Chris Hipkins: The all-powerful Regulations Review Committee!CHRIS BISHOP: The all-powerful! They're so powerful! I mean it's hard to mock the Regulations Review Committee. I was a member of it for three years with David Cunliffe. Angie Warren-Clark: Ha ha! We're not surprised.CHRIS BISHOP: Well David Cunliffe was actually a very good chair of the Regulations Review Committee. I realise he's a controversial figure—Matt Doocey: Oh you are a bit tired!CHRIS BISHOP: Yeah I am a bit tired! He was quite a controversial figure at various points in this place but he was actually a very good chair of the committee. And David Parker sat on the committee too and Chester Borrows so it was an all-star cast when I first became an MP but they do a great job. So there you go I've made a few jokes.We support these orders and we support the work of the Regulations Review Committee thanks.
van Velden BrookeBROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): I rise on behalf of ACT in support of continuing the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act. In times of adversity we want to support our Government. COVID-19 has challenged every country. Every Government has responded in its own way. But the Opposition has a role to play too. As an Opposition party—and fast-growing one at that—ACT has adopted a constructive mantra through the COVID period. Our mantra has been to make constructive criticisms when necessary helpful suggestions where possible and ask the questions New Zealanders need answered.When the COVID-19 Public Health Response Bill was passed ACT supported it while making suggestions for how it could be improved. When those suggestions were ignored by the Government we opposed the bill at the third reading. We believe it is important that the law is written down and accessible. It should be transparent. Sending orders to the Regulations Review Committee is the right and proper thing to do. We watch for abuses of Government power. We've continued to monitor how the Government makes its orders and gives notices under this Act. We believe at this time the Act should be renewed. Since it expires tomorrow the Minister has left it not a moment too soon.However it is clear that the Government is not using the powers as it could. Let me give just three recent examples. Number one: border workers still aren't vaccinated. One of the most powerful things that the Government could do to save us from the uncertainty cost and pain of lockdown is to make sure that those working at our borders are vaccinated. They don't have to get vaccinated but they don't have to work there endangering the rest of New Zealand either.Number two: border workers aren't being tested. The person at the centre of a recent near-outbreak hadn't been tested since November. This Parliament gave the Government the power to insist on testing but it hasn't been used effectively.Number three: the Australian opening. All the Government needed to do was put in place the same rules that New South Wales did. Parliament gave them the power to do it. But we stayed shut for no reason for six months.So we think that the law should be written down. We are happy that they are not abusing it. We are happy for the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act to continue. But I say to this Government: if we're going to give you this power then for God's sake use it competently. Thank you Madam Speaker.
Genter Julie AnneHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green): Tēnā koe Madam Speaker. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. The Green Party is supporting this motion. We just want to acknowledge that there were extraordinary powers and as the Minister said in his comments it included powers that none of us would have imagined possible or supported before we found ourselves in this situation of a global pandemic. But I think that globally it's recognised that New Zealand's done really really well in our response and that the Government has been very balanced open transparent and measured in its use of these extraordinary powers and has really used them in so far is it was necessary to ensure that our people were safe from COVID-19.Of course I like many other people in this House have friends and family who live in other countries where the virus has just gone rampant and not been controlled and there've been serious health consequences for the people there. There have been very serious economic consequences and they haven't been able to live life as freely as we in New Zealand have been able to during this past year. So the Green Party thinks that these powers were justified. We totally understand the extension of the bill and we think that it is a reasonable amount of time to extend it. That is all we have to say. Thank you.
Mallard TrevorPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: No petitions have been presented.A paper has been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Minister for the Environment on the operation of the Ozone Layer Protection Act 1996 for the period 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020.SPEAKER: That paper is published under the authority of the House.Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Health Committee on the petition of Helen Morgan.SPEAKER: The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of bills.CLERK: Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Bill introductionLand Transport (Vehicles Responding to Electrical Emergency) Amendment Bill introduction.SPEAKER: Those bills are set down for first reading.
Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): Point of order Mr Speaker. If I may just explain to the House. Thank you Mr Speaker. The money that was raised through the New Zealand Rural Games Trust is over $6000 for scholarships for agricultural students—youth. So that's where the cause is going to. But it's also been substantially supported by Sir John Kirwan in terms of bringing attention to rural mental health and wellbeing. So two worthy things happening there and that's the reason why I'm here today. Thank you.
Points of Order — House Dress Code—Branded Apparel
Sage EugenieHon EUGENIE SAGE (Green): Point of order. Your guidance Mr Speaker then: is business attire to include clothing branded with logos?SPEAKER: Generally no but in this particular case the member has sought advice appropriately as to what she was going to be wearing and it was certainly my view that on balance given the very good cause that is involved I'm prepared to let it pass.
Shaw James; Mallard TrevorPOINTS OF ORDERHouse Dress Code—Branded ApparelHon JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): Point of order. Mr Speaker when you were earlier this year considering business attire there were some submissions that were concerned that allowing MPs not to wear ties would be the beginning of a slippery slope towards a very different standard of dress in the Chamber. And I wonder if you might like to reflect on that this afternoon.SPEAKER: Well I have been reflective of it and I've been warned of it and I think I only have one comment to make and that's: whakanuia te tangata. Ringa raupā. [Exalt the person. Calloused hands.]
Hipkins Chris; Bishop ChrisBUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Today the House will adjourn until Tuesday 4 May. The start of the annual review debate will be rescheduled for that day. The Immigration (COVID-19 Response) Amendment Bill will complete its remaining stages. Other legislation to be considered will include the first reading of the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Bill and the second readings of the Holidays (Increasing Sick Leave) Amendment Bill and the Fair Trading Amendment Bill.CHRIS BISHOP (National): Thank you to the Leader of the House for those remarks. Can I ask him whether or not the Government will give some thought in the upcoming recess to the re-establishment of the Epidemic Response Committee?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): The Epidemic Response Committee was established when Parliament was not able to sit when question time could not happen when the regular scrutiny of Government activity was not available to members of Parliament. That is no longer the case.
Salesa JennyTHURSDAY 15 APRIL 2021The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Ke tau lotu. 'E 'Otua Māfimafi kuo mau taa'i mālie 'i ho'o 'ofá mo e ngaahi tāpuaki hono kotoa. 'Oku tuku homau lotó ka mau hū atu ke ke malu'i ange mu'a 'a e Kuiní mo tataki ange 'emau fua fatongia 'i he Fale Aleá 'aki 'a e poto Faka-e-'Otua 'ofa pea mo e 'ulungaanga malū ko e 'uhí ko e mo'ui mo e melino 'a e fonuá. 'Oku mau kole atu 'a e ngaahi me'á ni hono kotoa 'i he huafa ho 'aló pē 'e taha ko Sīsū Kalaisi ka ko homau fakamo'uí 'Emeni.
Wednesday 14 April 2021 - Volume 751
Policing (Killing a Police Dog) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Policing (Killing a Police Dog) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion not agreed to.
VoteASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members before we come to the votes on this bill I'll let you know that there will be two questions put which has been agreed by the Business Committee. The first is about the House taking note of the select committee's report. When we've dealt with that the second question is on whether this bill should proceed. So the question is that the motion be agreed to. Motion agreed to.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question now is That this bill now proceed. A party vote was called for on the question That the motion be agreed to.Ayes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion not agreed to.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): This bill will not proceed and will be withdrawn from the Order Paper.
Protection for First Responders and Prison Officers Bill — Report of Justice Committee
VoteHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): A point of order Mr Speaker. I wonder if the Speaker could just advise what the motion is so that we can consider it. I wasn't aware that we actually had a motion on this debate.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Oh all right. The question at the beginning of the debate was moved by Dr Duncan Webb and he moved that the House take note of the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement. After that speaker I was in the Chair and I stated that the question is that the motion be agreed to. And now the motion is in.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Just speaking to that. Those words are used and there are times when a vote isn't taken.A party vote was called for on the question That the House take note of the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement 2021.Ayes 110New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.
Budget Policy Statement
1. Question No. 1—Electoral (Integrity Repeal) Amendment BillCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi) to the Member in charge of the Electoral (Integrity Repeal) Amendment BillQUESTIONS TO MEMBERSQuestion No. 1—Electoral (Integrity Repeal) Amendment Bill1. CHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi) to the Member in charge of the Electoral (Integrity Repeal) Amendment Bill: What reports has he seen on his Electoral (Integrity Repeal) Amendment Bill? Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Member in charge of the Electoral (Integrity Repeal) Amendment Bill): I have seen a report from the shadow Attorney-General on my bill that concludes that its passage would ensure our Electoral Act complies with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. This report is consistent with the report I have also seen from Professor Geiringer of Victoria University New Zealand's renowned expert on the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act that the 2018 law changes breach the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act in respect of freedom of speech and freedom of association.Chris Penk: Has the member seen any other reports on the bill that raise concerns about the effect of the law on New Zealand's democracy? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Yes I have. I have seen a report on my bill by 23 legal academics from five law faculties four departments of politics—SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I just want an assurance from the member that this is not a submission on the bill—that it is a report. Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Yes it is a submission from those 23 legal academics and—SPEAKER: Well thank you. Hon Dr NICK SMITH: —Mr Speaker I'd be delighted if both yourself and the House would read that submission. It shows how important my bill is. SPEAKER: Well I think the fact that I recognised it might have meant that I have. That concludes oral questions—Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Point of order Mr Speaker. I seek the leave of the House to table the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act report on the Electoral (Integrity Repeal) Amendment Bill by the shadow Attorney-General. SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that? There's none. It will be tabled. Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.