edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Falloon AndrewANDREW FALLOON (National—Rangitata): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. It's a pleasure to be taking a call this afternoon on the first reading of the Financial Markets (Derivatives Margin and Benchmarking) Reform Amendment Bill. The reason it is such a pleasure is that I was sitting in my office and I heard someone refer to this bill as a bit dull" and that disappoints me a little bit actually because I'm quite excited about it. And the reason for that is that before I came become an MP I worked on this issue for a fair while actually. So it's a real pleasure for me to be seeing it come to this House and I want to commend and thank Kris Faafoi for doing that. I am excited and when I think about the bill I think back to probably three or four conversations I had on it and on this issue with a very friendly lawyer. It took him about three conversations I think for me to finally understand it and so I apologise to Anthony if I do get any of it wrong this afternoon in trying to explain it to members across the House and I'm sure the many people who are watching at home.So at present New Zealand banks use offshore finance to fund their activities and those banks enter into derivatives contracts to hedge against the exchange rate risk in raising money in foreign currencies. Due to a change in G20 rules banks are facing a barrier to accessing those international derivatives markets and so it's really important for us to now tidy up our legislation to ensure that banks can still access those offshore markets because the effect if we didn't do that would be quite simple and it would be increased interest rates. And that would obviously lead to a huge cost on families and to businesses. So this is a fairly small and technical bill. I do look forward to hopefully sitting on the Finance and Expenditure Committee while this bill is being considered. It's a worthy change and one that needs to happen; if we didn't it would lead to additional costs for families and businesses. I commend it to the House."
Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. It's a pleasure to be talking on the Financial Markets (Derivatives Margin and Benchmarking) Reform Amendment Bill. It's an interesting bill isn't it because derivatives are actually a fundamental part of our financial systems but unfortunately not many people know about them. They're the glue as financial systems got more sophisticated over time in terms of how you allocate risk and how you manage risk. That's essentially what they're about.So derivatives take a number of forms. Many people talk about futures and you can buy futures for gold. You can talk about buying an option or warrants that are issued or swaps and traditionally in the financial market setting you have swaps as an example that covers foreign exchange movements or interest rate movements. The reason why these are so crucial in terms of managing risk is that for many players in the financial markets and banking in particular where they want to make sure that they capture a certain profit and they don't want to be at risk of changes in the value of the currency or changes in the interest rates what they will do is disaggregate parts of the financial instrument and sell or trade that part. They might be wanting to buy a fixed-rate instrument even though they've offered a floating mortgage rate to New Zealand house owners. Or they might agree to sell currency at a certain price at a certain date and they don't know what the price is and they're not prepared take the risk so they buy that in advance. Those are traditional types of derivatives and it's a huge market. I presume most people have been quoting from the same report but the reason why it's so large in terms of the value—and the report talks about $8.7 trillion worth of trades—is most of these arrangements only have a 90-day lifespan. So in fact you're having to roll them over regularly although of course many of these have a longer term. But a great portion of them have quite a short term and therefore the issue is around how they are treated and how when you buy one—and if you're out of the market which happens during the course of the period if it's a 90-day one at some point you might be in the market; at other points you might be out of the market—that is where a margin call comes in. And this is what this bill is about: how you manage that margin and how you keep sufficient amount of margin those financial institutions that ensures that the financial markets are secure. That is what this bill is principally about. The other bit is around licensing of the financial benchmarks and again this is a new area driven by the EU. And I think it is vital that there's a record of it and how it's benchmarked and obtain the records behind it. It's going to be a fascinating discussion in the Finance and Expenditure Committee. I'm looking forward to working with the members in the Government circles because I'm sure many of them have a good grasp of this detail. I commend the bill to the House Madam Assistant Speaker.
Dean Jacqui; Rurawhe AdrianHon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. This bill is supported by the Opposition through the House—the Financial Markets (Derivatives Margin and Benchmarking) Reform Amendment Bill. There have been a number of contributions around a fairly narrowly defined piece of legislation. So I don't propose to go through it all again. I don't think that would add much to a debate where everyone is in support of the banks having a more appropriate regime in place to continue and ensure continued access for New Zealand benchmark users to access European financial markets.So this was originally a National Government Bill. We're happy now to support it in Opposition and congratulations to the Hon Kris Faafoi for progressing it. I do see that the Financial Markets (Derivatives Margin and Benchmarking) Reform Amendment Bill is enjoying quite steady stakeholder support and feedback. So ACC and super fund who submitted jointly; the New Zealand Bankers' Association; Russell McVeagh; Chapman Tripp and Buddle Findlay also did a joint submission; and then RITANZ which is Restructuring Insolvency and Turnaround Association of New Zealand—all wrote and submitted in support of this very narrow bill.I just want to do a shout-out to the Hon Judith Collins and her baking with the Finance and Expenditure Committee (FEC). I was not aware that there was baking going to FEC. That's a bit of a challenge to the rest of us. Challenge accepted. I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): This is a split call. I call Paul Eagle—five minutes.
Goldsmith PaulFINANCIAL MARKETS (DERIVATIVES MARGIN AND BENCHMARKING) REFORM AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 5 March.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker and I do want to say a few more comments about this piece of legislation. Ultimately what we're talking about is the Financial Markets (Derivatives Margin and Benchmarking) Reform Amendment Bill which amends a number of Acts to remove impediments to compliance with foreign margin requirements for over-the-counter derivatives which will enable relevant New Zealand entities to continue to enter into certain types of derivatives and international counterparties following changes to the EU and G20 countries' rules around this kind of financial market activity. It also establishes a new licensing regime for administrators of financial benchmarks under the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013. So ultimately we are broadly supportive of the policy intent. We are aware that most of the market players are keen to see this happening so that they continue to have access to these instruments. It will go off to select committee now and of course the devil is always in the detail when it comes to this kind of legislation. Many things can go wrong and quite often you can achieve exactly the opposite of what you've set out to achieve so we'll go through the select committee process in detail. The only point I wanted to make was that fundamentally this bill is doing something quickly in order to maintain our access to capital international capital—our access to international flows of money in order for us to invest and to grow our economy. We support that and we're glad that the Government is doing something about it. But I do make the point that it stands in stark contrast to everything else that the Government is doing. Here they're maintaining our access to capital but at the same time they are considering a capital gains tax which would increase taxes on investment and nobody believes that taxing investment more will lead to more investment. So I can't believe for a moment that that would lead to New Zealanders having more access to international capital coming into this country and also domestic savers investing more and growing this economy. So we'll support this bill but we just wish they were more consistent in their thinking around investment and attracting investment to this country in order to grow our economy and to provide jobs and opportunities for New Zealanders. Thank you.
Carter DavidRt Hon DAVID CARTER (National): Well I do want to take a brief call on this and only because it's a process that we shouldn't be observing in this Parliament. I do also want to state right at the start that I do have a vested interest in this legislation of course being one of those poor people that shivered all last winter ever grateful for the $750 that Mr Faafoi gave me. Thank you very much Mr Faafoi. So I don't want to hold it up again but I guess that's one of the arguments we had right at the start about sharp process. This legislation—in fact we've heard our colleagues talk about it going to a select committee for three weeks. Well it actually doesn't get three weeks because this committee now needs to receive this legislation after it's been read today in the House and then it needs to determine how long it will open for submissions and I guarantee not much time can be given for that. So the opportunity for any person to have a fair input into this legislation and to try and get it right is considerably less than three weeks.The Hon Peeni Henare who had the unfortunate task of introducing this legislation—I noticed the Hon Carmel Sepuloni didn't want to introduce it herself. Mr Henare is embarrassed to have to do this—I accept that and I guess he could have done one worse process than what he's attempted to do and that's to rush it through under urgency with no consultation at all. But to open it up to three weeks which effectively becomes two weeks for people to prepare submissions and then put them before the select committee is a farce. We all remember when the legislation was introduced into the House and then a 500-page Supplementary Order Paper was presented on the day the House was to debate the legislation. I remember the debates clearly. In fact I think I spoke in one of them saying to the House that mistakes will occur because of rushed process. I'm far from convinced that rushing this process now and trying to slam it through before 1 April will not again lead to further mistakes. This Government needs to get its act together it needs to consult properly and the worst aspect of the debate we heard on the first reading today was the Hon Tracey Martin having the arrogance to come down to this House and say It's not the Government's fault. It's the officials that got it wrong." That is not appropriate. The Government mucked it up the Minister mucked it up and the National Opposition warned the Minister at the time it went through that it would be mucked up. I'll go so far as to say today in this House that because the process has been rushed like it is almost unconstitutionally—because it's being rushed I will guarantee we're back again amending this legislation and ironing out further mistakes because a bumbling incompetent Government is not doing the job properly."
Henare PeeniHon PEENI HENARE (Associate Minister for Social Development) on behalf of the Minister for Social Development: I move That the Social Security (Winter Energy Payment) Amendment Bill be reported to the House by 1 April 2019 and that the Social Services and Community Committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).
Loheni AgnesAGNES LOHENI (National): It is about the people. I've heard that a number of times from members across the House. It is about the people—it is about the people. But the reason we are here today discussing this is because the Government overlooked those people. They overlooked the vulnerable the elderly in our community. In their haste in their rush and in their arrogance to push this process through they did not allow decent time to hear from the community to hear from the people and so this is what has happened. Let us think: if these are little minor changes what else has been overlooked? Has there been consideration of the fact that for example some New Zealanders live in extremely colder climates than say in the northern parts—for example the Chatham Islands? Is there consideration of that or other things that may come up over time? Again the rush the haste rushing the process—this is what happens: it punishes the very people that we are here to serve. It is particularly interesting to note that the proposed retrospectively applied amendments appear in this to be in conflict with their own previous Labour Party stance and I refer to the Hon Chris Hipkins when he stated Retrospective legislation is not right." The fact that our kaumātua who happen to be in care facilities were overlooked by this Government is a lack of attention to vital detail that is becoming all too common with this Government I fear.On the one hand I can at least understand the Government's attempt to rectify this oversight but it doesn't address the fundamental problem with this bill and that is its lack of fair due process with the community. I cannot support this amendment. Thank you."
Tinetti JanJAN TINETTI (Labour): I was going to actually stand here and say well there's not a lot to add to this debate because we've got such a small piece of legislation and again as has been reiterated it is actually just looking at the drafting errors and fixing those drafting errors.Chris Bishop: Yeah that's right. If you'd done your job properly we wouldn't be here.JAN TINETTI: You're quite right there Mr Bishop. I'm so pleased you can read the legislation and add to the debate as well. But I was so taken by the passion of my colleague here Mr O'Connor beside me talking about wine cellars. I just have to add here as well about—Kieran McAnulty: He nearly lost his teeth.JAN TINETTI: I did think that too Mr McAnulty. I thought that Mr O'Connor's teeth were going to go flying at that stage with that passion. I just feel that I need to add to that. You really reminded me of quite a number of things that can come into this debate here. It is a small piece of legislation but the overall piece of legislation that this is adding to means so much to so many New Zealanders out there. To hear that people fill their wine cellars—how out of touch is that? That has to be the most out-of-touch comment that I have ever heard.I have sat with a number of children—in fact in 2016 11 children—at their bedsides. They had been hospitalised because they had been in houses that weren't fit for purpose. They had respiratory complaints. In fact one of those particular 11 children that I sat with had rheumatic fever. That is not a situation that I ever want to repeat again.We are in this House because we have the ability to do something about that and that is not just this side; that is that side as well. We have the ability to change that and make people's lives better. Some say Oh we're outraged because it's being pushed through." but there is an urgency with the 1 May payout. We need to get this right. Let's work together and make this right for all New Zealanders here. To sit there and be outraged that this is being pushed through means that that side are completely out of touch with what is happening. People are dying—people are dying—and I have had experience of that because of inappropriate housing. We can get this right for every single one of those people and make a difference.Many people have come to me—we hear that they've come to fill wine cellars; I still think that is an unbelievable comment and a shocking comment—to say how much difference the energy payment has made in their lives. Seeing people coming into one room a family of six coming into one room for months over the wintertime is really heartbreaking. Seeing those families now actually in warm dry housing because of a simple winter energy payment is really heartening. As a Government as an actual Parliament as this House we have the ability to change people's lives. Let's work together on this. I commend this bill to the House."
Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Well what a terrible contribution we just had from the other side of the House. This piece of legislation the Social Security (Winter Energy Payment) Amendment Bill is a piece of legislation which is not necessary to be going through this Parliament if the Government had actually done their job the first time. I heard Tracey Martin talking about drafting errors. She was throwing the bureaucrats under the bus throwing the officials under the bus because they as parliamentarians and as legislators in this House failed to do their job the first time. That's what this bill is about. Ultimately we as parliamentarians we as legislators take responsibility for the laws in this land. It is us who put our names to the legislation that we pass and what the members on the other side did—what Tracey Martin on the other side did—was throw the bureaucrats and the officials under the bus for their hard work and she should be taking responsibility for the decisions that they made.So we will be opposing this piece of legislation. The Government should be doing its job properly and furthermore the tax cuts which National had legislated and which were repealed would have ensured that the same people who qualify for this now so-called winter energy payment which is neither a winter payment nor an energy payment would qualify for an increase in their superannuation—and that would also increase with the median wage as it goes up. So this legislation is opposed by this side of the House. It is retrospective legislation. More importantly there are better ways to ensure that we look after the incomes of those who are on superannuation rather than trying to dream up other types of payments which aren't specific and don't actually meet the ends which members on the other side of the House are trying to achieve. We will oppose this legislation. Mr Assistant Speaker thank you.
O'Connor GregGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu): They used it to fill the wine cellar—they used it to fill the wine cellar. If ever you wanted to hear how out of touch some of those privileged people across the aisle are I refer you to that expression They used it to fill the wine cellar." Excuse me Mr Assistant Speaker sometimes I just feel that it has landed on me. Can I just bring the Opposition back to what we are talking about here. We're not talking about wine cellars we're not talking about having black BMWs in the driveway; we are talking about 1600 people who die each year from living in a cold house. If you look at the article by Ruth Nichol in the Listener in 2017 you'll see it was 1600 people. OK the National Party has 40 electorate members—40 people have electorates. That means 40 people in each of those electorates will die this year if this bill doesn't go through. Just think about that. Those of you who may have been brought up in State houses those of you who—Hon Ruth Dyson: Not on that side.GREG O'CONNOR: No some were—some were—and you might note that when some of them talk about it they immediately talk about how well they were treated and how good those things were—but shouldn't we sell them? That's what I hear.But back to this bill. This is something that I think it's actually quite good that we're back here for because it allows us on this side of the House to focus on what we're doing and how important what we're doing is and I just hope that somewhere on the benches across there someone will sit and think that the fact we're back talking about this is actually a very good thing. I hope they will just think there is more to life than the year of your wine—that this is actually a life and death issue for many of the people who deal with it.In fact it's a life and death issue for people who live on their own and I just think that one of the best things that's happened now is the fact we're back talking about this—the 1600 people who will die this year as a result of living in cold houses. Can I just leave you with that and ask you to compare that with the other side of the argument we've just heard—compare that with wine cellars. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker."
Pugh Maureen; Rurawhe AdrianMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thanks very much Mr Assistant Speaker. There's been certainly plenty of passion attached to this debate this afternoon and it's no wonder. I recall the Hon Tracey Martin's contribution first up where she literally threw the officials under the bus because they had made a drafting error. A tiny tweak is required to fix a really small drafting error. Well the reality is that it is the role of the select committee to scrutinise the wording to scrutinise the bills that come before this House to go through the wording to question those officials and to seek more information if that is what is required. But when you do not have the ability to scrutinise a bill because there is no select committee process it's the very reason that we are here today trying to fix up the mess that this Government has created. That is the job of the select committee that is the democratic process that is what has been robbed from the people of New Zealand and that is why we are here in clean-up mode.I have to say that when it comes to the committee stage I'm going to suggest that we even change the title of this bill so that it is actually called the Clean Up the Mess Bill" or the "We Told You So Bill" because it was articulated more than once that we were going to end up in trouble in this House because the wording was so badly put together. So here we are. I mention the contribution from Gareth Hughes here who said "Find me somebody that will not take $265 million in contributions for a winter energy payment." The reality is this is a winter payment. It's not necessarily for energy and I can tell you that the people I have spoken to in the people's houses I have been into are very grateful for this payment. In fact one couple told me that they filled their wine cellar as a result of this payment last winter. Other people also took their summer holidays and loaded the credit card from this winter payment. It is not an energy payment and had we proceeded with the tax reform that this Government put in place they would have been even more better off than they were with the $31 a week that these guys want to give them.We are going to vote against this bill and for this House's information the committee was told yesterday that the submissions for this piece of legislation close on Tuesday. Thank you.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): This is a split call. I call Greg O'Connor—five minutes."
Hayes JoJO HAYES (National): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I stand to take a short call on the Social Security (Winter Energy Payment) Amendment Bill. It's quite entertaining listening to the Government side of the House trying to justify why they have brought this bill—this retrospective piece of legislation—back to the House when it could have all been sorted and they could have done the right process back in May of last year when the winter energy payment clause was in the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill. If the Minister had actually done the work correctly and as my colleague Simon O'Connor said in his contribution had actually done the work and given the 500-plus page Supplementary Order Paper for that particular bill back then back to the select committee for oversight and also for public scrutiny as well then we would not be sitting in this House going over this piece of legislation that really does—and I support what Simon O'Connor said—waste the House's time.Why should we be debating this when the Minister knows full well that her scrutiny of all the pieces of legislation that come through this House under her name must be correct. It must follow the same process. And we're arguing process here Mr Assistant Speaker. We are arguing the process that Government—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Don't bring me into the debate thank you.JO HAYES: OK. So what we're doing is arguing about process—whether or not the Government did the right process—and this is a great example of them again not doing the right process. A short report-back time—why? Why can't this bill have public scrutiny? Is it because they are trying to ram through this piece of legislation like they did the previous legislation in May of last year? Is it too much to ask this Government to stop showing their arrogance by ramming these types of bills through? They're very important bills but they continue to ram these down the throats of New Zealanders and that is actually an insult to the people of this country.When the previous speaker Priyanca Radhakrishnan talked about how we are getting quite dramatic well that's our job. Our job is to actually ensure that this Government keeps to parliamentary process. It's there for a purpose. It's not there to be scorned to be laughed at and to show that much arrogance about. That's all we're asking but no this Government is not listening. It is not listening.So I cannot support this bill. I along with the rest of my colleagues oppose it. We oppose this bill. Get a life and get the practice of parliamentary process correct Government. Thank you.
Korako Nuk; Mallard TrevorNUK KORAKO (National): Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā huri noa i Te Whare nei e mihi atu ki a koutou katoa. I'd like to take a short call on the Social Security (Winter Energy Payment) Amendment Bill first reading. Actually that previous speaker Tracey Martin should be called Teflon" because of the fact that it's really easy isn't it just to sort of push that aside. Particularly if we come back to what Simon O'Connor actually said in his speech about this kind of legislation—travesty legislation by stealth time wasting retrospective legislation shoddy legislation and denying New Zealanders the right to speak on this bill—when we think of all of that that's exactly what it is.The bill actually looks like a couple of minor technical changes but when you look at it it's actually more of a case of cleaning up after the Government's efforts last year. The previous speaker just tried to actually blame officials for their mistakes when this is actually about shoddy legislation.I think the other part of it though is actually when you look at the result of this this comes around because the Minister dumped a 500-page Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) last May into this House 24 hours out from the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill. What we have here is that they failed to get the details right in regards to the winter energy payment. So it's very very clear on this side of the House that we oppose the SOP which introduced the winter energy payment into the Social Security Act and we continue to oppose this particular legislation also today. Nō reira e mihi atu ki a koutou katoa.SPEAKER: Priyanca Radhakrishnan.Hon Kris Faafoi: Two minutes of outrage.SPEAKER: Order! I called one member. One member had the call and another member started talking. I think members of the Government need to sort out which of them is going to take the call and that's the person who should speak not Mr Faafoi."
Business Statement (Continued)
Martin TraceyHon TRACEY MARTIN (Minister for Seniors): So let's just get back to the facts shall we? Let's just calm things down. And while Mr O'Connor is perfectly happy for his own benefit to try and create some sort of drama about this let's just talk to what this amendment bill is about.So in the first hundred days of this Government we put through a Families Package and part of that was the winter energy payment. So this is an amendment bill to the winter energy payment. Let's be clear: the winter energy payment and the intent of it have been implemented since that legislation passed. What Mr O'Connor is attempting to inflate and conflate and all sorts of other things—he's talking about a Supplementary Order Paper on something that was slightly different from what was the Families Package but that's all right; Mr O'Connor is well within his rights to decide that he's going to dramatise this. These are what are called drafting errors". Drafting errors are where the highly skilled New Zealand public servants who do an awful lot of work spend an awful lot of hours here at the service of their country putting together pieces of legislation made a couple of mistakes. That's what happened. That's why the report back day is 1 April.Suddenly Mr O'Connor is quite happy to say that they already knew it was wrong; so I'm not quite sure why they feel that they need a longer period of time to be more right than they were right before—according to Mr O'Connor. He also says that this is wasting the House's time; so therefore I cannot understand why they would argue against the 1 April report back date if they believe it's so important not to waste the House's time. This is a simple drafting error. It's two pieces of wording that were not 100 percent correct because the very hard-working public servants who serve our nation for extreme hours got a couple of bits wrong and the winter energy payment—the intent of it—is being paid. Nobody has missed out. Let's be clear: nobody has missed out. These payments are being made; hence why we want to make it retrospective. We want to make sure that the payments that have been made quite rightly through the intent of the policy due to a couple of wording issues legally have received their payments. That's what this piece of legislation is about. That's why we want to pass it by 1 April.Mr O'Connor says the National Party knew all along it was wrong. He should be celebrating that we can put this through quickly. They should be supporting it they should be supporting the report-back date and that's all this is about. This is not dramatic. This is not a large and difficult issue. The Opposition can grandstand as much as they like but New Zealand First will be supporting just these small amendments due to drafting errors around the winter energy payment. Kia ora."
Hipkins ChrisBUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have had some further advice; Mr Brownlee is correct. The tax R & D bill is still before the select committee. It is due to be reported back shortly and it will be passed by early May but the provisions in it are retrospective and take effect from 1 April.
Hipkins Chris; Brownlee Gerry; Mallard TrevorTHURSDAY 7 MARCH 2019The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Karakia.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Legislation to be considered next week will include the third reading of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19 Modernising Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill the first reading of the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill the second reading of the Local Electoral Matters Bill the committee stages of the Local Government Regulatory Systems Amendment Bill the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Amendment Bill and the Commerce (Criminalisation of Cartels) Amendment Bill. The second reading of the Ngāti Rangi Claims Settlement Bill will take place on Thursday 14 March.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): Mr Speaker thank you. I want to first thank the Leader of the House for the outline of the Government's forward legislative proposals. I have two matters that I'd like to get clarified if we could.First can he further inform the House if it's his intention to seek House time to give effect to the comments by the Minister of Research Science and Innovation this week that there will be a Taxation (Research and Development Tax Credits) Bill passed and enacted by 1 April 2019.Secondly is it the Government's intention to adopt the members' bill Broadcasting (Games of National Significance) Amendment Bill (No 2) in the name of Clayton Mitchell to ensure that all New Zealanders can watch the Rugby World Cup free to air later this year?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): With regard to the first matter that bill has already been passed. With regard to the second matter that's a member's bill.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): No no. You've got the wrong bill. The bill I'm questioning about is still in a select committee.SPEAKER: Right. Well I do expect—given the clear difference—that if the Leader of the House is inaccurate he will come back in and correct during the afternoon. Thank you.
Tuesday 12 March 2019 - Volume 736
Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19 Modernising Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19 Modernising Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a third time.
Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a first time.The question was put that the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill be referred to the Health Committee.A party vote was called for on the question That the motion be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; Ross.Motion agreed to.
Appropriation (2017/18 Confirmation and Validation) Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Appropriation (2017/18 Confirmation and Validation) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a first time.
11. Question No. 11—AgricultureHon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of AgricultureQuestion No. 11—Agriculture11. Hon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of Agriculture: Does he stand by all of his statements?Hon SHANE JONES (Minister of Forestry) on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture: On behalf of the Hon Damien O'Connor yes. Hon Nathan Guy: Does he stand by his statement to the New Zealand Herald over the weekend in reference to the Tax Working Group and I'll quote I've not had an opportunity to read the whole report"?Hon SHANE JONES: On behalf of the Hon Damien O'Connor he reflected that he is aware of the content of the report but has not gone bookend to bookend.Hon Nathan Guy: What official advice has he received to back up the statement he made on Rural Exchange on Sunday in reference to the Tax Working Group report and I'll quote "It probably won't affect the vast majority of farmers."?Hon SHANE JONES: On behalf of the Minister the Minister is incredibly accurate. At this stage it remains a bunch of recommendations offered by Dr Cullen and his grandees and until such time when Cabinet makes a decision the Minister's statements are entirely accurate.Hon Nathan Guy: Has he read recommendation 11 which "recommends introducing input-based tax instruments including on fertiliser"; if so what position does he take?Hon SHANE JONES: On behalf of the Minister yes the Minister and other Cabinet Ministers are aware of that recommendation which is why it's out there in the ether. Until such time when Cabinet deliberates and forms a position it remains a part of the broader atmosphere. Hon Nathan Guy: What does he believe a natural capital enhancement tax to be?Hon SHANE JONES: On behalf of the Minister as I said obviously the member is referring to either the recommendations or the content of Dr Cullen's report—something which is not the business or the Cabinet-mandated business of this Government."
7. Question No. 7—Trade and Export GrowthPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) to the Minister for Trade and Export GrowthQuestion No. 7—Trade and Export Growth7. PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) to the Minister for Trade and Export Growth: What progress has been made if any on growing exports?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for Trade and Export Growth): Notwithstanding volatility and rising protectionism in some offshore markets 2018 saw strong gains for our exporters. New Zealand's goods and services exports increased 7 percent in dollar terms in the 2018 calendar year. A particular highlight was exports to China with goods exports growing 15 percent and services exports increasing 12 percent for the first year. Two-way trade reached $30 billion for the first time. This Government is helping deliver sound economic growth and we continue to support our exporters by broadening our trade agreements.Priyanca Radhakrishnan: What has been the effect of the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) agreement coming into force for New Zealand exporters?Hon DAVID PARKER: The agreement has been in effect for just over two months but early signs are very very promising. The quantity of beef exports to Japan for instance increased 300 percent in January 2019 from a year earlier and New Zealand butter exports to Canada jumped by over 600 percent from January 2018 to January 2019. While both of these huge increases may be somewhat inflated by exporters waiting for CPTPP to come into effect there's no doubt it has massively helped. I look forward to New Zealand exporters and the many people they employ benefiting from the continuing opportunities that the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement delivers.Priyanca Radhakrishnan: What progress has been made on negotiating new free-trade agreements (FTAs)?Hon DAVID PARKER: We're making good progress on negotiating an FTA with the European Union as we continue to push for significant improvement in market access to the world's largest trading bloc. Despite the uncertainty around Brexit we're poised to negotiate a comprehensive trade agreement with the UK if and when they're ready to do so. We're making good progress on the China FTA upgrade and we hope to soon launch negotiations for an upgrade of the New Zealand - Australia ASEAN agreement. We're constructively and actively defending the system of the World Trade Organization trade rules by developing constructive proposals for reform with 12 other like-minded economies. This is a Government that continues to pursue new export opportunities and with the rising tide of protectionism we need to ensure we continue to make progress for our exporters around the world.Hon Todd McClay: Given the statistics the Minister has just informed us of on trade with Japan can he confirm that he's pleased he put down his Trans-Pacific Partnership protest sign and has signed a deal that was always comprehensive and progressive?Hon DAVID PARKER: The member is so glass half empty"."
4. Question No. 4—HealthJO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 4—Health4. JO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister of Health: What steps are being taken to manage the measles outbreak in Canterbury?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Health): Vaccination is the best protection against measles which is highly infectious and a serious disease that spreads easily from person to person. So far there have been 25 confirmed cases of measles in Canterbury in the current outbreak. To help contain its spread the Canterbury District Health Board (DHB) has announced an urgent vaccination campaign. I'm advised that 18000 doses of the measles mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine are on their way and due to arrive in Canterbury in order to be available for use from tomorrow.Jo Luxton: Who will be at the front of queue to receive vaccinations?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Those decisions are being taken by clinicians at the Canterbury DHB in consultation with experts at the Ministry of Health and Pharmac. I'm advised that the priority groups are firstly children and young adults aged five to 28 years old who are not immunised children 12 months to five years who have never received any doses of MMR children and young adults aged five to 28 years old who have only received one MMR dose to date—the four-year-old MMR can be brought forward to no sooner than four weeks after the previous MMR—and finally adults aged 25 to 50 years; this group only received one dose of measles vaccine in our previous regime. Measles is highly contagious and it is in everyone's best interest that people in these priority groups get vaccinated both to protect themselves and the wider community.Jo Luxton: Will this urgent vaccination campaign disrupt routine MMR vaccination around the rest of New Zealand?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: It's important that while we deal with the outbreak in Canterbury we continue with the usual MMR vaccine elsewhere around the country. I'm advised that we have sufficient vaccine in the country and scheduled to arrive in coming weeks to contain the outbreak in Canterbury and to maintain the regular MMR vaccination programme.
1. Question No. 1—FinanceKIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Finance1. KIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I've seen a number of recent reports that highlight the solid fundamentals of the New Zealand economy as we transition to a more modern and resilient economy. Statistics New Zealand reported on Friday that the volume of building activity rose 2.7 percent in the final quarter of 2018 driven by strength in building work on non-residential buildings. The nationwide 5 percent increase in non-residential construction was the strongest quarterly figure in nearly three years while residential construction growth of 1.2 percent in the quarter was similar to September. On an annual basis total building work in place was up 3 percent with residential up 2.4 percent and non-residential up 3.9 percent. Meanwhile Statistics New Zealand also reported on Friday a 4 percent rise in meat and dairy manufacturing led by a 2 percent overall rise in the volume of New Zealand manufacturing activity in the December quarter. I am pleased to see yet more real data demonstrating the solid underlying fundamentals of the New Zealand economy.Kiritapu Allan: What recent reports has he received from Treasury on the economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Treasury's latest weekly economic update report shows a concerning trend of slowing global economic growth. In Australia GDP figures for the December 2018 quarter show growth was lower than expected at 0.2 percent in the December quarter and lower than the 0.3 percent growth recorded in the September quarter. Likewise both Canada and India recorded slower growth in the December quarter. Meanwhile other reports note that in the US GDP growth slowed for the second straight quarter and the economy added just 20000 jobs in February against expectations of 180000 new jobs. Last week the eurozone recorded 0.2 percent growth in the December quarter and the European Central Bank downgraded its forecast for 2019 GDP growth from 1.7 percent to 1.1 percent. Despite the more positive news out of New Zealand recently and forecasts of solid economic growth here this data remains a risk to New Zealand's outlook.Kiritapu Allan: How is the Government responding to the economic risks posed by international factors?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The risks posed by the international situation continue to demonstrate the importance of our commitment to responsible fiscal management. We are continuing to manage debt at responsible levels. We are running sustainable surpluses managing expenses carefully and making the important investments in New Zealand's future that will leave us in a position to respond to any potential global downturn.
Accident Compensation Amendment Bill — In Committee
Dyson RuthACCIDENT COMPENSATION AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeHon RUTH DYSON (Senior Whip—Labour): I seek leave for the committee to take this bill as a single question for the purpose of the debate and for the provisions to be voted part by part. CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Leave has been sought. Is there any objection? So be it.
Huo RaymondRAYMOND HUO (Labour): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise to take a short call to support the Local Electoral Matters Bill. The Justice Committee received and considered 27 submissions from interested groups and individuals. We heard oral evidence from 10 submitters. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank our officials advisers and more importantly the submitters especially Blind Citizens of New Zealand Blind Foundation and Local Government New Zealand.There are 17 recommended changes notably clause 5 …Voting method for elections and polls…" clause 11 "…Supply of information on age and Maori descent …" clause 12 to supply an update of birth information and recommendations 13 and 14 are a contingency mechanism with regard to recasting the vote voiding and rerunning all or part of any election.I very much look forward to the committee of the whole House debate. I commend the bill to the House.Bill read a second time."
Local Electoral Matters Bill — Second Reading