edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Carter David: Visitors — Australia—Delegation Victorian Legislative AssemblyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Visitors — Australia—Delegation Victorian Legislative Assembly[Sitting date: 21 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5103. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members I am sure that members would wish to welcome a delegation from the Victorian Legislative Assembly led by the Hon Matthew Guy Leader of the Opposition who are present in the gallery.
UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUrgency[Sitting date: 21 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]UrgencyHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):I move That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing through all stages of the Land Transport (Speed Limits Validation and Other Matters) Bill. The Land Transport (Speed Limits Validation and Other Matters) Bill removes uncertainty concerning the validity of speed limits and consequential enforcement actions dating back to 2004. It retrospectively confirms that local councils and road-controlling authorities had the unambiguous legal power to set speed limits and will continue to do so into the future.The ability to set speed limits and enforce them is essential for road safety. This is why the Government is moving swiftly to eliminate any ambiguity uncertainty or confusion around the legislation. This legislation as it was first intended is designed to protect the best interests of the motoring public.Motion agreed to.
Authority to Administer OathText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAuthority to Administer Oath[Sitting date: 21 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5103. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Authority to Administer OathMr SPEAKER: Members the following authorisations have been received by the Deputy Speaker and the Clerk of the House from His Excellency the Governor-General to administer the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to be taken or made by members of the House. The authorisations read:Pursuant to section 11 of the Constitution Act 1986 I Lieutenant General The Right Honourable Sir Jerry Mateparae Governor-General of New Zealand hereby authorise youThe Honourable Kerry James (Chester) BorrowsDeputy Speaker of the House of RepresentativesandDavid Martin WilsonClerk of the House of Representativesto administer to members of Parliament the Oath or Affirmation of Allegiance to Her Majesty The Queen required to be taken or made by every such member before that member shall be permitted to sit or vote in the House of Representatives.BILL ENGLISH Acting Prime MinisterAuthorisedJerry Mateparae Governor-General16 July 2015
Visitors — Australia—Delegation Victorian Legislative AssemblyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVisitors — Australia—Delegation Victorian Legislative Assembly[Sitting date: 21 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5103. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Tuesday 21 July 2015Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.VisitorsAustralia—Delegation Victorian Legislative AssemblyMr SPEAKER: Honourable members I am sure that members would wish to welcome a delegation from the Victorian Legislative Assembly led by the Hon Matthew Guy Leader of the Opposition who are present in the gallery.
Draft transcript - Thursday 24 September 2015Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Thursday 24 September 2015
Draft transcript - Wednesday 23 September 2015Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Wednesday 23 September 2015
Draft transcript - Tuesday 22 September 2015Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Tuesday 22 September 2015
Sittings of the HouseText is subject to correctionSittings of the House[Sitting date: 17 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:47. Text is subject to correction.]Sittings of the HouseJOANNE HAYES (National):We have done a lot of work this week so I seek leave for the House to rise.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Leave is sought for the House to rise early. Is there any objection to that? There appears to be none.
Points of Order — Unparliamentary Language—WithdrawalText is subject to correctionPoints of Order — Unparliamentary Language—Withdrawal[Sitting date: 17 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:36. Text is subject to correction.]Points of OrderUnparliamentary Language—WithdrawalThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The question is that the motion be agreed to but before we go to the next speaker I invite David Clark to make a withdrawal.Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In respect of my previous comment during question time as requested by the Speaker I withdraw.Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a separate point of order. I seek your considered ruling on the use of the phrase that I withdrew and on similar phrases. A quick search of the Hansard has revealed that raising questions about the honesty of members appears to have become more commonplace and that the exact same entreaty that I used today during question time is recorded on more than one previous occasion in the Hansard with no such rebuke from the Speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I am not prepared to give an undertaking on behalf of the Speaker or to say that he will come back with a considered ruling. I do not think that it is my place to do so. It may well be that the Speaker does in fact look at this and consider whether it is appropriate. However I will warn the member that Speakers as far back as Statham and Oram have indicated that one has to take particular care with anything that might be a reflection on the Speaker. Alleging inconsistency of that sort is one of the things that are a reflection on the Speaker. I was not in the House this afternoon; I did not hear what happened. I have been briefed on it. The particular words used have been used in the past—there is no doubt about that—and they have also been ruled out of order in the past. It is I think a question of context.If members are in fact alleging that a Minister is deliberately not telling the truth then the appropriate thing to do is to write a letter to the Speaker and to ask for a reference to the Privileges Committee. That is I think the approach of the Standing Orders and members may get more satisfaction through that approach than they do by making comments that sound as if they lead to disorder and cause problems for the House. So what I will do is leave it at that. If Mr Speaker wants to make a considered ruling then I have no doubt that he will. [Interruption] Sorry I have just had a quick briefing and as is often my case I have declined to take the advice.
Draft transcript - Thursday 17 September 2015Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Thursday 17 September 2015
Sittings of the HouseText is subject to correctionSittings of the House[Sitting date: 17 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:45. Text is subject to correction.]Sittings of the HouseJOANNE HAYES (National):We have done a lot of work this week so I seek leave for the House to rise.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Leave is sought for the House to rise early. Is there any objection to that? There appears to be none.
Draft transcript - Wednesday 16 September 2015Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Wednesday 16 September 2015
Draft transcript - Tuesday 15 September 2015Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Tuesday 15 September 2015
Tisch Lindsay: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is subject to correctionTisch Lindsay: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:75. Text is subject to correction.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. The time has come for me to leave the Chair. This debate is interrupted and set down for resumption next sitting day. The House is suspended and I will resume the Chair at 9 a.m. tomorrow for the extended sitting.Debate interrupted.
Mathers Mojo: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is subject to correctionMathers Mojo: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:5. Text is subject to correction.]MOJO MATHERS (Green):I want to speak in support of the Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) on behalf of the Green Party. I was on the select committee when the petition was being considered by the Government Administration Committee. As well as the sheer number of people who have supported the petition the quality of the evidence that was presented by the petitioner Kyle Lockwood was of a very high standard. With a depth of the research he had gone into researching all the countries around the world that have a longer passport period the reasons why how we were actually out of step with where the rest of the world was going with having longer passport periods and how the concerns around security were no longer a rationale for keeping to a short passport time. So it was looking at that evidence and discussing backwards and forwards with the officials that persuaded the Government Administration Committee that we actually needed to recommend going back to 10-year passports. This is what the public wanted.Passports are part of many people’s extensive documentation in New Zealand both for identification but also because New Zealanders love travelling and a high proportion of New Zealanders do travel. They go to meet with family and friends around the world—in the Pacific Islands in Australia and further afield. We are a nation of migrants and we often want to reach out to friends and family in other countries. So passports are extremely important to New Zealanders and having to renew them effectively every 4½ years was incredibly stressful for many families. It is not just the cost; it is the inconvenience and the hassle planning for a trip and then going to look for your passport and suddenly realising that you have got to actually reapply for your passport and all the hassle that is associated with collecting and collating the documentation required. So it is fantastic that we across the House have agreed that we are going to make things smoother and easier for New Zealanders in applying for passports. Extending the term will be a popular move. We know it will be. That is why we on the Government Administration Committee recommended that the House look towards adopting this bill.
Tisch Lindsay: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is subject to correctionTisch Lindsay: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:5. Text is subject to correction.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Mojo Mathers—5 minutes.
Smith Stuart: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is subject to correctionSmith Stuart: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:5. Text is subject to correction.]STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura):The Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) speaking as someone who has done a lot of business travelling is going to be a great thing. It will be great to be able to have a passport for 10 years. It is quite infuriating having just 3 or 4 years ago replaced my passport to then turn up in the US—I travelled through there quite frequently and to the UK—and have a biometric photograph and fingerprints taken. Every time you go through the US you line up and get all that and you wonder why on earth we have to have a passport renewed every 5 years. I understand the background as to why we went to a 5-year passport. However the rest of the world did not go along with us so it was time for a change.The previous speaker Clayton Mitchell stated just before that it would be good to have done this a few months ago as the people who have just renewed their passports would not have had to go through the process. But of course you would have to keep going back and back and there will always be people who renewed their passport the month before and would be quite annoyed about it. But that is just the nature of the beast.The ability to get a 10-year passport when their renewal comes up and also to do it at a much reduced cost over that 10-year period—$90-odd I believe—is a fantastic Christmas present for New Zealanders. I think it is a great thing for everyone and really it is good sense to get good law and good security and all the latest features that are going to be on these passports.Really security is so important around the world and we have to have the best travel documentation to ensure that we meet our security obligations around the world. It is not just ourselves we are looking after; it is the rest of the world. Someone alluded to the fact that our passport is the eighth most desirable passport in the world—that is something I learnt this evening—and we are ahead of the Australians on that. You can understand why.Hon David Cunliffe: What are you doing? Flogging them off? Auctioning them?STUART SMITH: No we are not auctioning them but we could auction off a few Opposition MPs although we would not get much for them I suspect. It is with great pleasure on that note seeing as we cannot get a bid for the Opposition MPs that I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.
Guy Nathan: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First ReadingText is subject to correctionGuy Nathan: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:1. Text is subject to correction.]Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries):I move That the Employment Standards Legislation Bill be reported to the House by 12 February 2016.Motion agreed to.
Draft transcript - Thursday 10 September 2015Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Thursday 10 September 2015
Draft transcript - Wednesday 09 September 2015Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Wednesday 09 September 2015
Carter David: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that particular course of action. Is there any objection from any member? There is none.
Hayes Joanne: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National):We have had a very busy week this week in the House and so I seek leave to lift the House early.
Carter David: Evidence Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Evidence Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5099. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be—Paul Foster-Bell: Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Paul Foster-Bell.
Carter David: Evidence Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Evidence Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5096. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I understand this is a 5-minute split call.
McKelvie Ian: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5082. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei):Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. So as an old pupil of the Regulations Review Committee and as a farmer—and most of the business of this bill concerns farmers—I certainly have a great deal of pleasure in supporting it as it goes through the House. Thank you.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Regulations Review Committee.
Tisch Lindsay: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5082. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Ian McKelvie.
Tisch Lindsay: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5082. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Your chance if you want to speak.Ian McKelvie: Not for long Mr Assistant Speaker. But as an old pupil of the Regulations Review Committee and as a farmer—
Williams Poto: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Poto: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5082. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East):I rise along with my colleagues in the House just to say that yes this bill is small but perfectly formed. It will validate and confirm those pieces of legislation that we need to confirm in order for them to remain valid. We commend this bill to the House.
Korako Nuk: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKorako Nuk: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5082. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]NUK KORAKO (National):Tēnā koe e te Mana Whakawā. I stand to take a short call in support of this bill. I too am really confident in it going to the Regulations Review Committee. I had a great opportunity to actually attend a meeting of this committee one morning. It was well chaired and it was oozing with collegiality—I thought that I was in the Māori Affairs Committee. Anyway the final thing that I can say about this bill is he iti he pounamu. It is small but it is pounamu. I commend it to the House. Kia ora.
O'Rourke Denis: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First):I am very glad that I am speaking in this debate after Mr Bayly otherwise I am sure I would not be nearly as excited about this bill as I am now. Indeed if I could only remember what he said I think I would be more excited still. However New Zealand First does support the bill which validates and confirms subordinate legislation made under various Acts that will lapse if not affirmed and which may need validation. I rely very much on the work of the Regulations Review Committee which has said: “We found no reason that the orders and regulations should not be confirmed or validated and confirmed.” I am sure that it has been through the bill in fine detail and that—Hon David Parker: That was what we said last year.DENIS O’ROURKE: That is fine. As long as they have deliberated on it and we can rely on what they say that is fine.Chris Bishop: It’s a new bill Denis.DENIS O’ROURKE: Anyway the point is this: New Zealand First has examined this bill—this bill—and we are satisfied that the various clauses relating to the legislation or regulations being confirmed or validated should be agreed upon. There are nine of them and I believe that everything contained in the bill is appropriate. We find no reason to question anything that is included in the bill. They are appropriate measures for a subordinate legislation bill. Accordingly we shall be voting in favour.
Clendon David: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClendon David: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID CLENDON (Green):I am pleased to take a brief call on this bill in order to confirm that the Greens will be supporting its referral to the Regulations Review Committee. These bills are necessary and important. Some might call them a necessary evil given the intensity and the detailed work that must sit behind them.Andrew Bayly: Oh how could you say that? That is unfortunate.DAVID CLENDON: I must compliment Mr Bayly on his obvious enthusiasm for the task. His positive attitude is to be complimented I think. If I may digress momentarily I will point out that Mr Bishop in extolling the virtues of the Regulations Review Committee—which are undoubtedly many—referred to it as a “bipartisan” way of operating. Given the make up of the committee one hopes that it is actually a “multipartisan” approach that that committee takes.Hon David Parker: You’re welcome to join.DAVID CLENDON: I certainly am not Mr Parker; no. The only aspect of this bill about which we are unsure is that it is normally the practice for these bills—validation and confirmation bills—to go through the House under the auspices of Standing Order 325 which effectively means that where the matters contained in the bill are limited solely to confirmation and validation matters the first reading is without debate. The bill is then sent off to the select committee immediately for the serious and no doubt detailed work that will be done there. It then comes back for a second reading which is debated. Then the third reading is held forthwith without debate unless for some unusual reason the bill goes through the Committee stage. So generally speaking the grunt work if you like is done at the select committee level with only one reading in the House.So we are simply unsure as to why the Minister has chosen to include matters that are out of scope for a validation and confirmation bill—namely the amendments to the Legislation Act which are no doubt well intentioned and which may be very necessary and important. It is just not clear to us why he has not chosen simply to create an amendment to the Legislation Act and leave the validation and confirmation stuff to go through under Standing Order 325. However we will see how that resolves itself in the course of the Regulations Review Committee hearing which we will participate in and we look forward with interest to seeing how this eventually pans out in the House.
Joyce Steven: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 1 to MinisterText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeJoyce Steven: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 1 to Minister[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Associate Minister of Finance):I seek leave to correct an answer I gave in the House this afternoon.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There no objection.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: This afternoon in response to a supplementary question to question No. 1 I listed a number of countries’ growth rates. I mistakenly referenced China when I should have referred to Canada.
Parker David: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5079. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour):I have a rare opportunity to disagree with the last speaker Andrew Bayly. Actually most of these are not disallowable instruments that are not legislative instruments; some of these are regulations. I do agree with the member Andrew Bayly whom I have got a lot of time for that the main categories of these pieces of subordinate legislation needing to be confirmed are things that are emergency regulations or things that impose levies or taxes.If you think about the reason for that it is that things that are generally more important are meant to come before the House. Things that are less important and more administrative are often delegated to arms of Government or indeed sometimes to bodies outside of Government like standard-setting boards and things. They are less important and they are done without scrutiny from Parliament. They have got the ability to put regulations in place. Sometimes things sort of fall a bit in the middle where they are getting close to something that is important enough for you to think “Well that’s the sort of thing that Parliament would do for itself.” but if it is an emergency thing that has to be done immediately rather than through some long legislative process then it is done by way of a regulation which then has to be confirmed within a certain period by Parliament or it lapses.In the case of things that strike levies which sometimes verge on being taxes—given that generally Parliament reserves for itself the right to levy taxes—these things then are done effectively in a way that is conditional upon parliamentary approval through the Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill. The most obvious one in this batch that falls if you like into that category is the setting of road-user charges or RUC and those road-user chargers are of course a substitute for excise duty which is a tax. So you can see why Parliament wants to retain some control on the setting of those sorts of levies and that is why they fall within the Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill.I am not going to repeat what has been said in respect of some of the non-standard provisions of this Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill being the tidying up of the different legislative confirmation rules that apply under different statutes. What has been said on that by other members will suffice. With those comments I support this bill.
Bridges Simon: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBridges Simon: Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5077. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Deputy Leader of the House)on behalf of theLeader of the House: I move That the Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Regulations Review Committee to consider the bill. Confirmation and validation bills are routine and technical and come before the House every year to confirm or confirm and validate subordinate legislation through an Act of Parliament. Confirmation to prevent lapse is a requirement of the empowering Acts under which the various orders or regulations have been made. Bills of this kind are not very glamorous but they are important bills none the less.The role played by the House in confirming or validating the various items and the scrutiny provided by the Regulations Review Committee provide a layer of protection in the regulation-making process. Should the House decide to withhold its approval for a particular regulation or order contained in the bill that regulation or order will lapse.Part 1 relates to a total of 22 items of delegated legislation. It confirms 20 items and validates and confirms two items. Part 2 of the bill rationalises the terms and operation of all existing confirmation and validation provisions currently in more than 35 Acts by replacing them with one set of standard provisions in the Legislation Act 2012. Simplifying and standardising the terms and operation of the scattered and unhelpful varying confirmation and validation provisions will benefit all departments that administer Acts containing confirmation and validation provisions. A rationalised process will also make the preparation and enactment of every annual confirming bill a simpler process.Standing Order 325 provides for a streamlined enactment process for confirmation and validation bills. There is no amendment or debate for the first reading and following the bill’s second reading the bill proceeds if no amendment in Committee is required immediately to its third reading with no amendment or debate.Because of the rationalising provisions contained in Part 2 this year’s bill is not eligible for that simplified process. However the bill is structured so that if the Regulations Review Committee so chooses the bill can be divided into the Subordinate Legislation Confirmation and Validation Bill which would be enacted by the end of the year in accordance with the process and time line for confirmation and validation bills.In the legislation confirmable instruments would be progressed when the House considers appropriate. The bill traditionally receives cross-party support. All of the orders and regulations in this year’s bill are of a technical character. The 22 orders or regulations listed in the bill have been made under 10 different Acts and I do not propose to go through those. I do commend this bill to the House.
O'Rourke Denis: Appointments — Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Deputy Judicial Conduct CommissionerText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Appointments — Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Deputy Judicial Conduct Commissioner[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5075. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First):New Zealand First is very happy to support the motion for the appointment of Alan Ritchie as the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Kathryn Snook as the Deputy Judicial Conduct Commissioner. They are clearly both very well qualified for the roles and I am sure they will perform them very well indeed. I would like to actually take this opportunity to congratulate them both on their appointment and to thank them in advance for the valuable work they will do. It is certainly not an easy job.The Judicial Conduct Commissioner in his most important role has to look at which complaints brought to the commission are actually able to be investigated and need to be investigated. That requires quite a lot of sifting-out work because as I think we all know some people make an application to the commissioner simply because they are dissatisfied with the result of their case. That does not mean they have a genuine complaint that should be taken through the process. But where there is a genuine complaint against judicial misconduct or at least an allegation of it then it is important that the country has a means by which people can work through that. Without the Judicial Conduct Commissioner there would be no such avenue. So it is an incredibly important role and it is one that I think these two people will carry out very well.It was not so long ago that the Justice and Electoral Committee actually spoke with the Judicial Conduct Commissioner—the then commissioner—and we all took a great deal of interest in what he had to say on that occasion. One of the things I remember was the sheer volume of work that the commission had to undertake and the difficulty in carrying out that sifting process I mentioned. One of the things that is very important is the appointment of a deputy and that is one of the things that we are doing in this motion today.So for those reasons New Zealand First is very happy indeed to see the appointment of both the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and the Deputy Judicial Conduct Commissioner. We are particularly pleased that these two people have agreed to accept their appointments because I do think that they will make a very very good job of it. We should all be very proud of the way in which the commission has so far operated and the way in which I think it will continue to operate in the future.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Canterbury Earthquake Recovery—Proposed Changes to Governance StructureText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Canterbury Earthquake Recovery—Proposed Changes to Governance Structure[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5072. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon Ruth Dyson seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the Government’s proposed new governance structure to replace the existing arrangements for the Canterbury earthquake recovery. This is a particular case of recent occurrence. The Government announced the proposed new structure at 12 noon today. It involves ministerial responsibility. The announcement about the new governance structure is an important one likely to be of considerable public interest.However the Government’s announcement also indicated that legislation would be introduced to give effect to the new structure. Consideration of this bill will provide opportunities to debate the proposed new governance arrangements. For that reason the application is declined.
Dean Jacqui: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5070. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki)to the Minister for Small Business: How are small businesses benefitting from Government policies that are helping to keep interest rates lower for longer?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs)on behalf of theMinister for Small Business: A strong growing economy and low interest rates help create an environment that supports small business growth. Policies limiting the amount of extra Government spending lowering personal and company taxes and focusing on sustainable jobs have contributed to GDP growth of 2.6 percent while at the same time reducing upwards pressure on interest rates. Annual business investment increased by 13 percent over the past 2 years to record highs and is expected to increase by a further 15 percent by mid-2018. That is why this Government is better for business.Jacqui Dean: Why are lower interest rates important for small and medium businesses?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Small and medium businesses are now more confident as they have been operating in a growing economy and enjoying low interest rates. Lower interest rates help ensure small businesses have good cash flow. Cash flow gives small businesses certainty when paying bills. This is in contrast to 2008 when the economy had been in recession for 1 year prior to the global financial crisis and mortgage interest rates were over 10 percent.Ria Bond: If the Minister is such a big champion of small business as he claims then why is he not calling for an immediate cut in the official cash rate along with reforming the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act to put our exporters first?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: I just want to pass on to the new member of the caucus that the Reserve Bank is not foreign-owned and it would not be appropriate for me as a Minister to instruct it in any way.
Barclay Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarclay Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5067. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.TODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland)to the Minister of Immigration: How is the Government supporting Queenstown’s labour market through immigration?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Immigration):This week the Minister for Social Development and I announced a new streamlined labour market test process at Queenstown. This new process will enable employers with a low-skill vacancy to receive formal advice from Work and Income prior to lodging a migrant work visa application rather than Immigration New Zealand contacting Work and Income after the application has been lodged. Work and Income will refer any suitable New Zealanders to the employer for consideration. Employers will also have access to an updated list of jobs where advice is required if Work and Income has no job seekers available to fill the positions. This change replaces the temporary labour market test exemption which was in place during the busy summer tourist season and ended on 30 June.Todd Barclay: How will this process benefit employers in the region?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: New Zealanders will always be first in line for jobs but this Government recognises that for certain roles that are hard to fill employers need to bring in migrant workers and this new system provides a quicker and more effective solution for them. I am advised that at 30 May fewer than 100 job seekers were registered with the Ministry of Social Development in the Queenstown Lakes area. These changes in Queenstown help address the unique circumstances faced by Queenstown employers particularly tourism operators. The new process will provide for more certainty for employers and migrants as they know sooner whether a work visa application is likely to succeed.Sue Moroney: Does his plan to close the Queenstown Immigration New Zealand office support Queenstown’s labour market through immigration?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Matters of the deployment of the resources for Immigration New Zealand is for it to decide but I can inform the member that no decisions have been made on the future of the Queenstown office.Sue Moroney: I seek leave to table an Official Information Act request response detailing that five onshore Immigration New Zealand offices have been identified for potential closure: Queenstown Wellington—Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is enough description there. I will put the leave. Leave is sought to table that particular Official Information Act document. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Whaitiri Meka: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWhaitiri Meka: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5066. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.MEKA WHAITIRI (Labour—Ikaroa-Rāwhiti)to the Minister of Trade: Does he stand by the answers given on his behalf to Oral Question No 6 yesterday?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General)on behalf of theMinister of Trade: Yes.Meka Whaitiri: Does he stand by the statement given on his behalf that “there have been numerous instances of consultation with at least five Māori organisations including Federation of Māori Authorities Ngāti Kahungunu the Māori Medical Practitioners Association the Ngāpuhi Group and Te Kupenga Hauora Māori.”?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: When I said yes I meant yes.Meka Whaitiri: Given that answer why has Ngāti Kahungunu stated that “No Crown representative has ever approached briefed or consulted with Ngāti Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated.” on the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I certainly mean yes because they are wrong.Meka Whaitiri: I seek leave to table an email received today from the acting chief executive of Ngāti Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated stating that they were not consulted.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular email. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Meka Whaitiri: When or even will all these iwi be consulted in public on the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: They have been and Ngāti Kahungunu was consulted on two occasions: by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade in 2008 and by the former Ministry of Economic Development in 2010. If they said they have not been consulted they are wrong.Meka Whaitiri: Given that he cannot recall accurately which iwi have been consulted what confidence can other New Zealanders have that they will ever be consulted?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I do not know how I could be more precise. Ngāti Kahungunu were consulted. This will be the great litany of July. Ngāti Kahungunu were consulted and as I said yesterday there has been a regular pattern of sending out material to people including Ngāti Kahungunu.
Naylor Jono: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5065. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.JONO NAYLOR (National)to the Minister of Transport: What recent progress has the Government made on delivering the Urban Cycleways Programme?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport):Earlier today alongside the member Jono Naylor and Grant Smith the Mayor of Palmerston North as well as many happy children and much merriment I was delighted to open the Longburn shared pathway in Palmerston North. The Longburn pathway is the first project to be completed in the Government’s $333 million Urban Cycleways Programme which will see 54 cycleways rolled out across the country over the next 3 years. By central and local government working together through the Urban Cycleways Programme the project has been completed 6 years ahead of schedule and now provides residents with an alternative safe transport and recreational link between Longburn and Palmerston North.Jono Naylor: In what other ways is the Government’s Urban Cycleways Programme supporting the increased uptake of cycling in Palmerston North?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Last week I announced that $10.2 million will be invested in two further projects in Palmerston North as part of the Government’s Urban Cycleways Programme. The Manawatū River bridge and shared-path project will provide a safer and direct cycling route option for residents and allow over 6000 workers and over 7000 students to access work and educational centres. The Mangaone underpass project will provide an alternative and safer route for access to schools and residential areas west of the city. When completed all three cycleway projects will provide safe and healthy transport and recreational options for the people of Palmerston North.Darroch Ball: Does the Minister believe the Manawatū region’s priority is a $6.2 million “nice-to-have” cycleway or investing that money on the region’s essential roading infrastructure which this Government has consistently neglected namely the Manawatū Gorge a major artery to our region which has cost nearly $20 million just due to slips over the past 5 years?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I appreciate the member’s disappointment though that is primarily because he was not elected deputy leader of the New Zealand First Party; Ron Mark was. We are spending and we are investing $450 million in that region over the next 3 years some 30 and a bit percent more than the last 3 years. I went personally today and visited the gorge and Saddle Road. We are upgrading that road with about $4.5 million. We are focusing across the spectrum of transport modes in that region and that is why this Government is popular.
Seymour David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSeymour David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5065. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT)to the Minister for Social Housing: In light of [the Prime Minister’s] answers to Oral Question No. 2 on 30 June does she consider overseas investment in community housing projects to be consistent with the openness of other countries to New Zealanders investing internationally?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Housing):To my knowledge there is currently no overseas investment in community housing projects. However we would not rule that out. There are of course examples of New Zealand organisations investing overseas very effectively and I am sure that is in the best interests of New Zealanders.David Seymour: Does the Minister find it odd that some people are questioning whether Australian and other overseas parties should be able to buy into community housing projects in New Zealand while they also celebrate the investment success of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund which is substantially invested overseas and has over $25 billion of foreign investments 5 percent of which are estimated to be in property?Hon PAULA BENNETT: Yes—in fact I find a lot of things that some people say in this place to be odd. For example someone who may have once worked for an international charity organisation like Oxfam—which has a New Zealand presence but has a huge issue with obviously other organisations playing a part in New Zealand—would seem hypocritical.David Seymour: Is the Minister aware that the New Zealand Superannuation Fund has $2.4 billion invested in Australia that its 2014 annual report featured its diverse property investments in Europe and the US and that Kiwi households have in excess of $7 billion in direct investments in overseas sharemarkets and another $39 billion invested in funds that will also be substantially invested overseas; and does she agree that this no more hurts those countries than overseas investment in New Zealand harms us?Mr SPEAKER: In so far as there is ministerial responsibility—the Minister for Social Housing the Hon Paula Bennett.Hon PAULA BENNETT: I suppose the question was whether I am aware and yes I am. The figures that I have in front of me say that the fund’s overseas investments are worth $25.5 billion or 86 percent of the Superannuation Fund is invested overseas. Of course the fact that those advantages are being brought back to New Zealand will be in New Zealanders’ best interests.
McKelvie Ian: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5063. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei)to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent announcement has he made about Government support to help tackle hill country erosion?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries):Yesterday I was in the hills west of Whanganui to announce that nearly $8.8 million in funding grants over 4 years will be provided to help councils and farmers tackle hill country that is prone to erosion. This hill country erosion fund was established in 2007 and is part of the Government’s commitment to improve the sustainability of hill country. The current round is supported by funding from local councils and landowners and will provide funding that covers almost 550000 hectares of erosion-prone hill country.Ian McKelvie: Why is this scheme so relevant to landowners in the flood-affected areas of the lower North Island?Hon NATHAN GUY: Good question. I have seen the serious damage that hill country erosion has caused after the storm in the Whanganui Rangitīkei and southern Taranaki districts both economically and environmentally. This funding round is timely given that $4.7 million out of the total is going towards the Horizons Regional Council. This covers these districts that have been badly affected by some flooding and erosion. The fund allows councils an opportunity to plan and deliver initiatives over the next 4 years to tackle this problem. This includes projects like farm planning modelling and tree planting.
Graham Kennedy: Motions — Nauru—Government ActionsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGraham Kennedy: Motions — Nauru—Government Actions[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5059. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green):I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate expressing concern at the Government of Nauru’s actions.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none.Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM: I move That this House express its concern regarding the Government of Nauru’s alleged interference with the judiciary the suspension of Opposition members of Parliament the cancelling of passports of Opposition members of Parliament and the removal of civil and political rights.Motion agreed to.
Bridges Simon: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBridges Simon: Business Statement[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5059. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Deputy Leader of the House):Next week the House begins a 2-week adjournment. When the House resumes on Tuesday 21 July the Government will look to begin the Committee stage of the Appropriation (2015/16 Estimates) Bill and to make progress on a number of third readings on the Order Paper.
Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSittings of the House[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Sittings of the HouseJOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National):We have had a very busy week this week in the House and so I seek leave to lift the House early.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that particular course of action. Is there any objection from any member? There is none.