edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
van Velden Brooke; Verrall AyeshaBROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. I wish to speak to a Supplementary Order Paper in my name number 381. I think it's really important that we don't try and recreate the wheel. You know there's a lot of information that's held by international regulators very well respected international regulators that have already done essentially what New Zealand is aiming to do. We have very safe products found throughout the world in jurisdictions quite similar to ours that already have regulators. I think it's important that we have the ability for our regulator to use information that other regulators hold and to be able to adopt that rather than having to go through the process of using new information in New Zealand that will end up getting you to the exact same place. So my amendment is about inserting a clause after clause 379 saying that An exemption may be granted in reliance in whole or in part on the report assessments or decision made by or information received from an entity designated under section 346." A lot of information is stored internationally about medicines and devices and products that are already highly regulated throughout the world. Why do we need to impose more cost more time more resource on getting to the exact same point? Wouldn't it be easier if we could make sure that we can be guaranteed that information that's trusted internationally can be considered by this regulator to grant an exemption? That means we have less delay for new technology. We have less uncertainty about whether or not a product would get an exemption under this regulator and law and make it easier for people to have access to products that benefit their health. Thank you Mr Chair.Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): Thank you Mr Chair. Of course it is already the case that New Zealand's medicine regulator Medsafe relies on the decisions of overseas regulators in about 50 percent of the approvals that it makes. It's certainly not the case that everything begins afresh when medicine that's well established and authorised by trusted regulators seeks authorisation in New Zealand. In fact that approach is already taken in this bill: clause 346 provides the regulator with a general ability to rely on the decisions of designated entities in evaluating a therapeutic product or making a decision under this bill and that is why the Government does not support Supplementary Order Paper 381."
O'Connor GregPart 10 Administrative mattersCHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Members we come now to Part 10. This is the debate on clauses 363 to 382 Administrative matters". The question is—Camilla Belich: Point of order. I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is objection. The question is that Part 10 stand part. I call the Hon Gerry Brownlee.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I am leaving.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): It was an impressive entry.Chris Penk: Point of order. Just to point out I think that's what you call an involuntary withdrawal and apology.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): We'll bank it."
Kerekere Elizabeth; Verrall AyeshaDr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Independent): I just wanted to say that I am less concerned about the fact that if that group is formed it will be made up of committed individuals who will do actual work so long as the process is sound the selection is sound and it's rooted in finding who community would best want to represent them in that space. I did wonder though—and I want to express the concern that has been expressed to us from across the country that we've seen through this process where the Government did not heed its own agencies Te Aka Whai Ora and Te Puni Kōkiri who explicitly stated that rongoā should be excluded from the bill and that there should be strong Tiriti o Waitangi provisions in the bill.And so our concern is more that the people in that group may not actually get listened to when it comes their time to voice that opinion because we know advisory groups are there—and I have been on Government advisory groups before long before I came into this role. And it goes—the advice is given but somebody else makes the decision. And if one of the major concerns is making sure that people are not appropriating rongoā for financial gain—because that's a significant concern; I can see how people would try to do it but also there are certain constraints around that. Rongoā is a way of being; it's an entire practice. It's not about using particular individual ingredients for a particular lotion or treatment; it's a whole philosophy that's rooted in mātauranga Māori. So it should be very very simple to see that somebody is trying to make false claim so I'm fine that that is the place that it goes to.But I guess I wonder in the scale of advisory committees across the whole of Government can we assure our rongoā practitioners across the country that what gets said in there will actually be heard will actually be acted on?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): The Government has heard the concern from Māori about the regulation of rongoā. A number of hui were held around the country to understand the depth of that concern. There has been a tremendous effort made I believe in the Supplementary Order Paper that the Government has presented to make sure that that concern is addressed but it does create other unintended consequences which is why this committee is needed. It's mostly about the ability of natural health products that are not rongoā to escape regulation. So that is our purpose in setting up the committee. The member will note the process was put in place around how decisions about appointments to the committee are to be made. Te Aka Whai Ora is also capable of providing advice on these issues.
Belich CamillaCAMILLA BELICH (Junior Whip—Labour): I move That the question be now put.Motion agreed to.
Reti Shane; Verrall Ayesha; Penk ChrisDr SHANE RETI (National): The Therapeutic Products Bill has been in progress for many months now. Can I ask the Minister then if she has sought a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act opinion on direct-to-consumer advertising from Crown Law?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): I am advised that a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet is only provided on the bill not a Supplementary Order Paper.CHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Just in the spirit of helpfulness I think it might be helpful to point out that a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet can be provided or a further opinion can be provided—it's not required; the Minister's right to say that it need not be but it could be. I suppose if I could take the liberty of refining my colleague's question to ask if she's had any conversations with the Attorney-General or anyone else who would be helpful in the space of determining whether the Supplementary Order Paper might fall foul at admittedly a later stage of the legislative process.Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): I thank that member for that contribution. Yes I am confident I have thoroughly tested the advice about whether or not there are New Zealand Bill of Rights Act issues to be explored. I've heard from health officials and other officials that that is indeed the case. That was very influential in my decision to have the Supplementary Order Paper written as it is.
Verrall AyeshaHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I want to start by acknowledging the two contributions around direct-to-consumer marketing. There have been concerns raised by medical experts about the role that direct-to-consumer advertising can have in appropriate use of medicines and the harm and wasted resource that may occur from that. That evidence and those calls were what led the Government to amend the bill to include a provision for a regulation that is strengthened in my Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) to enable prohibition of direct-to-consumer advertising. So I'd just like to reiterate the difference: the Government's SOP allows prohibition of direct-to-consumer advertising in regulation whereas SOP 372 from Dr Reti and 383 from Mr Menéndez March puts that into legislation. So in essence those members from those parties and the Government are in agreement that there is a case here for harms from direct-to-consumer advertising and it is appropriate that we seek to prevent that through our legislation.I want to be clear—interestingly the other two contributions made in the Chamber this morning illustrate the risks that may be present in this approach. Mr Mooney made a contribution about restrictions on advertising at trade shows of unapproved medicines and a concern that why would scientific meetings or trade shows occur in New Zealand if certain medicines that were at the cutting edge but not yet approved here couldn't be regulated? When the select committee considered the bill those sorts of unintended consequences from restrictions on advertising were considered and that's why clause 193 has been amended in the bill in the form it returned to the House in order to address that potential risk in unintended consequence. There is no intention of stopping experts from knowing about the advancements in science that occur in pharmaceutical science.It is the risk of unintended consequences by a blanket ban in the legislation in the bill that gives the Government pause when considering whether or not to vote for these SOPs and it is these types of unintended consequences that became clear at select committee that mean a blanket ban on direct-to-consumer advertising is not the Government's preferred position. Instead we have the opportunity to develop proposals take advice on them consult on them address the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act issues that have been raised—that I have been advised on by both the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Justice—and then make a decision and make a prohibition or other regulation in secondary legislation. That is the Government's preferred approach.This is not an area where we want to rush our legislative approach. There is a risk of unintended consequences as the select committee identified when it went into this area of restrictions on advertising. The select committee was very concerned about potential bans on forms of communication about medicines that we consider appropriate in a free society such as Givealittle pages such as advocacy such as satire.
McDowall JamesDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. I just rise briefly to contribute on this discussion regarding Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 383 in the name of Ricardo Menéndez March and SOP 372 in the name of Dr Shane Reti. I'd just like to hear the Minister's input into the concept of banning such advertising. I'd like to know if the Minister has considered any unintended consequences around this such as a lack of information that can be provided to consumers to patients. Perhaps they might go to the GP with a request that's not quite right but at least they're getting some more information and they're becoming aware of these treatments. I reflect on something on the news last night; there was a new treatment undergoing trials very successful trials for Alzheimer's disease. Could something like that be caught up in this where coverage is restricted or at least when something gets approved they can then not actually educate the public? So what are the Minister's thoughts on this? Thank you.
Mooney JosephJOSEPH MOONEY (National—Southland): Thank you very much Madam Chair. Minister I hope to raise an issue with you regarding clauses 193 and 194 regarding advertising. An issue's been brought to my attention by Business Events Industry Aotearoa about the effect that can have on medical conferences. I'm advised that under section 20 of the Medicines Act 1981 which these clauses I understand largely replicate Medsafe New Zealand restricts trade shows attached to a conference from displaying or discussing medicines that have not been licensed in New Zealand but are licensed in some parts of the world and therefore have relevance to delegates who may not be locally registered doctors. Obviously these trade shows are important for bringing others to New Zealand and they think there's probably about $90 million worth of business and direct spend that's potentially at risk here if we can't attract people here. I have had examples brought to my attention where for example Australian-based sponsors are nervous about coming to New Zealand and holding scientific conferences due to this issue. Additionally there are Australia-based clients who will not even consider New Zealand when the Australian delegates cannot be given the same information they'd expect to get in an Australia-based meeting. So I'm wondering if the Minister could clarify the intention of this and whether it will have that impact from his perspective.
Thursday 17 August 2023 - Volume 770
8. Question No. 8—PoliceHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa) to the Minister of PoliceQuestion No. 8—Police8. Hon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa) to the Minister of Police: Does she stand by her statement It is my view that New Zealanders feel safer"; if so why?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister of Police): Again I stand by my full statement at that time it was given. It is my view that New Zealanders feel safer with a Government on track to deliver 1800 extra police. We have now delivered on that commitment. I further stand by my commitments today that gang members and associates committing burglary theft fraud breaches of bail reckless driving driving while disqualified careless driving drink-driving or offences under the Search and Surveillance Act criminal investigations Act child protection Act and the sentencing and parole Act are not minor infringements. It's a shame that that member thinks that they are.Hon Mark Mitchell: Should Mongrel Mob gang members be able to wear their patches in public spaces?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: If that member is referring to the law that was passed in Whanganui and then later on not implemented it was proven to be unsuccessful and the former member now passed away from that team the Hon Chester Borrows also openly spoke that that was not an effective way of controlling gangs.Hon Mark Mitchell: Does the Minister think that Mongrel Mob members should be able to wear their patches in public?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I believe I answered that question.Hon Mark Mitchell: Is the Minister aware of legislation that I took through this House in 2013 that banned gang patches in schools and hospitals and public buildings has been a very effective tool for the police to apply pressure on gangs and stop gang patches from appearing in our schools and our hospitals?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: Yes I am aware of that legislation. I'm also aware of an even more successful operation called Cobalt which has brought 47000 charges against gang members. I consider that to be a far more effective way of controlling gangs and it's a shame that that member undermines our front line by saying those offences are minor.Hon Mark Mitchell: So if the Police Minister is aware of that legislation and she's aware that it's been very successful for the police as a tool and it's made the public feel safer then why does she continue to defend the Mongrel Mob and other gangs rights to wear their patches in public?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I did not defend that. All I stated was a far more effective tool than the one the member had spoken about is law enforcement with operations such as Cobalt which effectively cripple organised criminal networks. I believe that taking guns off gangs and charging them with offences is a far more effective tool than giving them a ticket to hang out together and taking their jacket off them."
4. Question No. 4—FinanceINGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 4—Finance4. INGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Workers are continuing to benefit from a resilient economy with wages rising faster than inflation. Statistics New Zealand reported that median weekly earnings from wages and salaries jumped by 7.1 percent in the June 2023 year the second-largest annual increase since records began in 1998 surpassed only by the previous year's annual increase. We know that many Kiwi families are doing it tough in the face of cost of living pressures and a deteriorating global economy but they are doing so while in paid work and with wages rising above inflation.Ingrid Leary: What did the Statistics New Zealand report say about median weekly earnings for women?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Women's median weekly earnings increased by 8.1 percent for the June year also the second-highest annual percentage increase on record. This is a positive result and shows the Government's plan for the economy is continuing to keep New Zealand moving in the right direction.Ingrid Leary: What did the report say about median hourly earnings?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Median hourly earnings from wages and salaries rose 6.6 percent in the year to June 2023. This was the second-largest annual percentage increase in median hourly earnings. Strong hourly earnings growth is also seen in average ordinary time hourly earnings as measured by the quarterly employment survey which rose 6.9 percent in the year to the June 2023 quarter and ahead of inflation.Ingrid Leary: What does this report reflect about the resilience of the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We do know that New Zealanders are doing it tough right now and that's why we've taken action to ease pressure on their budgets with cheaper childcare free prescriptions and half-price public transport for young Kiwis. It's also why we've significantly lifted the incomes of seniors families workers and students with the winter energy payment also providing cost of living relief for those eligible for it. We need to do this because Kiwis are doing it tough. We also know that we have to do our bit and real Government consumption is forecast to fall by 5 percent by the beginning of 2025. New Zealand is in good shape to weather difficult global conditions. We've got record numbers of people in work wages are rising faster than inflation tourists are returning in greater numbers and overseas workers are filling vacancies. Our public debt levels remain among the lowest in the world. Our job is keeping the economy moving in the right direction and creating conditions to support people in work and drive higher wages.
Thursday 27 July 2023 - Volume 770
Natural and Built Environment Bill — In Committee—Part 12
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that the Minister's amendments to Part 11 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 389 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 37New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the Part 11 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 40New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2; Whaitiri.Part 11 as amended agreed to.
Natural and Built Environment Bill — In Committee—Part 11
Natural and Built Environment Bill — In Committee—Part 9
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Given there are no other calls the question is that the Minister's amendments to Part 9 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 389 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 39New Zealand National 29; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 9 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 42New Zealand National 29; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2; Whaitiri.Part 9 as amended agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members Part 10 has been struck out of the bill following an amendment recommended by the Environment Committee.
Natural and Built Environment Bill — In Committee—Part 8
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 42New Zealand National 29; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2; Whaitiri.Motion agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that Simon Court's amendment to Part 8 on Supplementary Order Paper 389 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 392 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 39New Zealand National 29; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Amendment not agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that the Minister's amendment to Part 8 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 389 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 39New Zealand National 29; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendment agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 8 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 42New Zealand National 29; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2; Whaitiri.Part 8 as amended agreed to.
12. Question No. 12—Cyclone RecoveryCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi) to the Minister for Cyclone RecoveryQuestion No. 12—Cyclone Recovery12. CHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi) to the Minister for Cyclone Recovery: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions in the six months since the Auckland Anniversary weekend flooding events and in the wake of Cyclone Gabrielle?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Associate Minister for Cyclone Recovery) on behalf of the Minister for Cyclone Recovery: Yes I do stand by my statements and actions in relation to the Auckland anniversary weekend flooding events and Cyclone Gabrielle in the context in which they were given. These events represent the second-largest natural disaster experienced in New Zealand behind only the Canterbury earthquakes in terms of damage and cost. The approach we have taken through the North Island weather events has always been one that is locally led with the support of the Government.Chris Penk: Does he stand by his statement then It's worth noting that after the Canterbury earthquakes it was four months before decisions were taken on the future of affected areas. We want to move quicker than that." given that it has now been six months since the initial flooding events?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: On behalf of the Minister I always stand by my statements and we are working together with councils on cost-sharing arrangements to buy out high-risk properties and we expect to say more on that soon.Chris Penk: Of the hundreds of displaced residents in Auckland how many have received a categorisation of their home?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: Under the use of land provisions in the law that is actually a decision for the Auckland Council and I do not have those figures on me as they are subject to Auckland Council. If you would like to put them in writing we will respond accordingly.Chris Penk: Of the following Ministers who were appointed as regional leads for cyclone recovery which of these still holds this role: Stuart Nash Meka Whaitiri Michael Wood Kiritapu Allan and Nanaia Mahuta?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: We have a number of great Ministers on this side of the House. On behalf of Minister Robertson we have the associate cyclone recovery Minister the Hon Barbara Edmonds; we have the Hon Kieran McAnulty; and I could provide a number of other lists of MPs in particular who have been working hard on the ground to support their affected communities.Chris Penk: Point of order. My question was in relation to those whom I named very specifically.SPEAKER: Yeah and the question was addressed. That concludes oral questions."
11. Question No. 11—Economic DevelopmentNAISI CHEN (Labour) to the Minister for Economic DevelopmentQuestion No. 11—Economic Development11. NAISI CHEN (Labour) to the Minister for Economic Development: How does the new Aerospace Strategy support Government goals for a high-wage low-emissions economy?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister for Economic Development): The launch of this country's first ever Aerospace Strategy marks a significant milestone. It delivers on two years of close work between Government industry iwi and other communities. It reflects broader plans for a high-wage low-emissions economy that guarantees economic security for all. Government has a critical role to play to unlock the potential of the aerospace sector. The sector has made clear that we should continue to provide the leadership needed for it to thrive and retain innovators.Naisi Chen: What is the estimated value of the aerospace sector and its future opportunities?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: The New Zealand space economy is estimated to be worth more than $1.7 billion. An increasing number of commercial space and advanced aviation companies are launching flying manufacturing and operating here. There's also an increasing market for downstream products and services using the data generated by aerospace technologies. The value of the wider sector such as design engineering and technical services and manufacturing is even higher. The global aerospace sector is growing fast and is estimated to be worth over $600 billion annually.Naisi Chen: Is the strategy and action plan supported by funding?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: When we launched the strategy last week I was able to confirm funding of up to $12 million to support the next steps. This is on top of $15.7 million in funding announced last year to support the implementation of the Aerospace Strategy. This funding will be prioritised for education initiatives research and development partnerships and further research into the potential of the sector.Naisi Chen: What actions does the strategy outline for the Government and the sector?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: The strategy outlines three pillars as the foundation for future collaboration between Government and the aerospace sector. The focus areas are unlocking aerospace potential by creating strong economic foundations a future-facing Government through greater alignments between Government and the industry and the idea of an aerospace nation which requires stronger engagement and marketing to the world.
10. Question No. 10—EducationPENNY SIMMONDS (National—Invercargill) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 10—Education10. PENNY SIMMONDS (National—Invercargill) to the Minister of Education: Does she consider the $65 million of Vote Tertiary Education funding allocated to set up the six workforce development councils (WDCs) has provided good value for money?Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Education): Workforce development councils are statutory bodies established in 2021 and play a crucial role in building links between industry and education providers to help keep curriculums and courses aligned with the development of industry needs. If the member is asking whether I think establishing organisations in the regions to match sector and industry needs with quality educational pathways is worthy of funding then yes I do.Penny Simmonds: Does the Minister consider it's a good use of taxpayer money to pay a WDC chief executive $128000 worth of discretionary leave as reward for excessive spending of taxpayer money on such things as meals of lobster alcohol and taxis in Sydney? Hon JAN TINETTI: As Minister I have no involvement in WDCs' relationships with employees so cannot comment. As public entities WDCs are expected to use public money wisely and maintain appropriate standards as employers. I'm advised the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) is closely monitoring the performance of the particular WDC that the member is alluding to.Penny Simmonds: Does the Minister think that a WDC board spending $194646 to deal with the chief executive who spent $72000 on the WDC's Visa card in his first year over double what all five other WDC chief executive spent in total is a good use of taxpayer money?Hon JAN TINETTI: The WDCs as statutory bodies are meeting their requirements under the Education and Training Act and getting on with the job that they were established to do. I haven't been advised of performance or financial issues at any of the WDCs that requires ministerial intervention. The TEC monitors the performance of WDCs against the expectations laid out in legislation. It also monitors their financial sustainability. WDCs are also subject to audit by the Auditor-General.Penny Simmonds: Does the Minister think the hundreds of staff being made redundant in the tertiary sector will be pleased or angry about the hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars being wasted on meals of lobster and alcohol legal fees gardening leave and finally a settlement pay-out to a WDC chief executive who has been in the job less than two years?Hon JAN TINETTI: As I've said as Minister I do not speak to employment issues.
9. Question No. 9—JusticeMARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister of JusticeQuestion No. 9—Justice9. MARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister of Justice: How has the Government enabled communities and hospitality businesses to get behind the men's Rugby World Cup later this year?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister of Justice): Last week the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Rugby World Cup 2023 Extended Trading Hours) Amendment Act passed its third reading with strong support across the House. We know that it has been a tough year indeed for hospitality businesses and these sensible practical changes to the law will help them to maximise their benefits and make it easier for fans and communities to come together to back the All Blacks. By passing the bill now businesses will have plenty of time to plan before the All Blacks open the tournament against the host France on 9 September.Marja Lubeck: Why are these changes necessary?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: These changes allow businesses to remain open outside of normal trading hours when televising live the men's Rugby World Cup matches and it saves businesses from having to go through the usual special licence process. We've designed these changes to strike a good balance between ensuring that licence holders have the support and the abilities they need to support communities as well as celebrating the All Blacks' victories with the need to minimise any potential harm. The Rugby World Cup is one of the most significant events in the rugby calendar and it's a special time for fans to come together. I'm looking forward to getting behind the boys in black when the tournament kicks off in September.Marja Lubeck: How will the changes ensure a safe environment for fans?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: Licence holders will be required to give at least seven days' written notice to police and their local council if they want to open for matches. This provision is designed to enhance public safety and ensure police have the information so they can deploy resources effectively. The bill sets clear eligibility criteria and extends trading hours that are only available to current on-licence and club licence holders whose licences have not been varied or suspended over the last year. We have learnt from previous amendments and this year's bill requires record-keeping to make sure we measure the impact of the changes for similar events in the future.Marja Lubeck: What do the changes allow licence holders to do?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: Eligible on-licence and club licence holders can extend their trading hours to televise games from the Rugby World Cup 2023 without applying for a special licence. If a licence holder has notified that they intend to open for a game for the venue it can be open for one hour before the game or extend their hours under certain circumstances. The venue must close for the sale of alcohol 30 minutes after the end of the game. These changes provide licence holders with certainty and flexibility to support their communities to be able to cheer on the All Blacks in a safe environment. Go the All Blacks.
8. Question No. 8—RevenueANDREW BAYLY (National—Port Waikato) to the Minister of RevenueQuestion No. 8—Revenue8. ANDREW BAYLY (National—Port Waikato) to the Minister of Revenue: Does she support a wealth tax and does she support the principles contained within the Taxation Principles Reporting Bill?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister of Revenue): No and yes.Andrew Bayly: Will she rule out requesting or commissioning any work from the IRD on introducing or implementing a capital gains tax or wealth tax while she is the Minister of Revenue or at least while the Rt Hon Chris Hipkins remains as Prime Minister?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: The Prime Minister has made his view very clear. We are not going to introduce a wealth tax or a capital gains tax and therefore I will not be working on one.Andrew Bayly: Does she accept New Zealand's tax system has been underpinned by the principle of having a broad-based low-rate taxation system and does she propose to change that approach?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: I do believe that New Zealand does have a broad-based low-rate system and what I do believe is that the tax system should be aligned with the recognised principles contained in the Taxation Principles Reporting Bill.Andrew Bayly: How does she define economic income" as has been inserted in the Taxation Principles Reporting Bill by her predecessor and how does that definition differ from taxable income?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: I understand the Finance and Expenditure Committee reported back the bill to the House today. I thank them for that work. My understanding is there is no economic income definition in the interpretation part of that bill. However I am willing to take time to consider the report back by the Finance and Expenditure Committee and will respond in due course.Andrew Bayly: Does she believe that the term "economic income" proposed in the Government's Taxation Principles Reporting Bill includes the concept of a tax on unrealised capital gains such as someone's KiwiSaver account or house?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: The current bill doesn't propose any tax. Again it provides principles in which tax policy can be designed in the framework."
3. Question No. 3—WomenANGELA ROBERTS (Labour) to the Minister for WomenQuestion No. 3—Women3. ANGELA ROBERTS (Labour) to the Minister for Women: How is the Government delivering for women?Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister for Women): The Government is delivering on our ongoing commitment to creating a fairer safer and more equitable future for women and girls. We are ensuring labour market outcomes are fairer women are recognised for their ability and ensuring that Government investment is improving outcomes for women and whānau. Investment into areas such as childcare assistance KiwiSaver for women on paid parental leave and training and employment pathways provides women and their whānau with the support they need now and the support and opportunities to thrive and get ahead. Angela Roberts: How is the Government helping to deliver better labour market outcomes for women?Hon JAN TINETTI: Our early childhood education (ECE) policy extending 20 hours free ECE to two-year-olds significantly reduces the cost of early childhood education for parents. It also allows parents to return to work or take on more hours if they can. We've also invested $35.2 million into childcare assistance to expand eligibility duration and improve access for families. These investments increase eligibility and will help approximately 30000 women currently accessing childcare assistance. We're implementing the Women's Employment Action Plan and we have passed fair pay agreements. This is on top of 10 settled pay equity claims that have corrected the pay for over 110000 employees—with the average pay correction being 32.4 percent—and the ongoing work to progress the 27 active claims across the economy.Angela Roberts: How is the Government supporting women in leadership?Hon JAN TINETTI: The Government has made a sustained and conscious effort to develop leadership and ensure that talented women are not overlooked for leadership roles. Representation on public boards is at a record level and the Government's target of 50 percent representation for women has been met for the last three years and 41.9 percent of board chair roles are held by women. The Ministry for Women have also established leadership learning hubs that show a range of courses and resources for women to grow their leadership and governance skills and has a nomination service to promote candidates for board vacancies.Angela Roberts: How is the Government investing in women?Hon JAN TINETTI: Budget 2023 saw expanded gender budgeting a powerful tool to help understand how Government spending and initiatives will impact people differently depending on their gender. This allows us to invest in programmes that we know will make a difference for women. The Training Incentive Allowance—with an investment of $80.1 million over four years to support sole parents disabled people and their carers to study towards higher-level qualifications—is a good example. Since 2021 90 percent of those who received this allowance were women. Supporting women into higher education and higher-paid employment helps reduce gender pay gaps and creates intergenerational benefits.
1. Question No. 1—Foreign AffairsDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) to the Minister of Foreign AffairsORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Foreign Affairs1. DAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What is the significance of the US Secretary of State's visit to New Zealand in terms of bilateral relations?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Foreign Affairs): The visit by US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken marks a significant milestone in our bilateral relations. The US is one of our closest friends and our meeting underscores the longstanding partnership between our two nations grounded in common interests and a shared commitment to liberal democracy and the rule of law. The visit is significant in the context of global diplomacy. At a time when the world is grappling with a host of challenges including conflict climate change and economic recovery this visit emphasises the importance of working even closer together. It signals our mutual readiness to collaborate and contribute constructively to the international rules-based system.Dan Rosewarne: How does the Minister perceive the role of the United States in further engaging economically in the Indo-Pacific region?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: The US plays a significant role in the economic dynamics of the IndoPacific region. We discussed the potential for the US to increase its economic engagement in the region which we believe could greatly contribute to the regional stability and prosperity of our Pacific region. This can be accomplished through more extensive trade relations investment in infrastructure and by supporting regional economic integration initiatives. We see a significant opportunity for the US to contribute positively to the economic development of our region and the signal of that intent is through the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity that New Zealand is participating in along with a number of other economies.Dan Rosewarne: How will New Zealand and the United States address the regional challenges identified by Pacific leaders especially with respect to climate change?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: New Zealand and the US discussed our common goal of supporting a peaceful stable prosperous and resilient Pacific region. This was a major topic in our conversation. Climate change is of course by definition of Pacific partners the greatest threat facing the Pacific and both our countries are committed to helping address this. Our climate finance initiatives are targeted to enhance the resilience of the Pacific and we're guided by Pacific partner priorities when delivering on this commitment. We're also mindful of the very real challenges of ensuring resilient infrastructure connectivity energy and food security as they are often areas impacted by climate change and felt by our Pacific partners more than most.
Craig LizDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a real pleasure to stand and take a call on this bill. As you walk around Parliament you see some amazing artworks and what they do is they really reflect the strength of our visual art community. The issue though is that some of our artists have some of the lowest median incomes in the country. So basically they benefit from the sale of their artwork on the first time that that sale occurs but the problem is that at the point where the artwork is sold on the secondary market they can no longer benefit.What this bill does is it ensures that we've got a 5 percent royalty that's going back to the artists but it's only on a specific set of criteria. It has to be sold by an art market professional or alternatively sold to or from a publicly funded gallery—so there's very specific criteria. If you're buying and trading or selling on a private art market then basically that doesn't apply although you can opt-in to make sure that the artist benefits.This is an important bill and we have heard some very useful submissions. My colleague Angie Warren-Clark read out one in her speech that just reflects the importance that this royalty will have to the artists that will benefit from this work. So this is a really important bill and I'm happy to commend it to the House.
Menéndez March RicardoRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Greens to speak to the Resale Right for Visual Artists Bill reading and the Green Party will be supporting this bill.This bill will support visual artists. Throughout its passage through the Social Services and Community Committee we managed to iron out some issues that arose. While we did align issues around the residency status requirements for the successors of the artists I think there are some ongoing questions about fairness—particularly around when collaboration happens between an artist who is a resident and an artist who is on a temporary visa. We did note through its passage through the select committee that that's an issue.There were also some questions raised around the structure of the body that will be in charge of collecting these fees. There are questions about whether this should be funded via the administrative fees that are collected or whether Government should just centrally fund it and then be able to adequately resource it.On the whole this is a good bill. While the Green Party may have not supported the fair-trade agreement that brought this bill into place we do think that having a regime as such will provide much-needed revenue for artists—visual artists in this case—who often may be struggling to make ends meet due to the lack of support that we provide for artists when it comes to income support. So the Green Party has to commend this bill.
Kanongata'a AnahilaANAHILA KANONGATA'A (Labour): Kia ora e te Mana Whakawā. It's always an honour and a privilege to make a contribution—a short one today on the Resale Right for Visual Artists Bill. This is a fair bill—this is a fair bill. The bill is really fair in terms of artists' royalty rights; it entitles visual artists to benefit from the resale of their artwork and if they do pass on from this life their descendants actually get that 5 percent.So what it does as we heard from everybody: it establishes a scheme to collect the 5 percent royalty. It also meets our free-trade agreement with the EU with the UK and of course Australia. There is an example where Australia had these resale rights for artists in 2010 and since from 2010 to 2022 it's actually earned $11 million so that's a lot of money that our artists and their descendants actually miss out on.I want to acknowledge the concerns that the last speaker spoke about in terms of the descendants—if the artist dies what happens to the resale with their descendants. The committee had talked about that in clause 14 of the bill and where we came down to was that the same citizens' or residents' rights to artists must also apply to the resale for their descendant if they pass away. But the difference is that the resale right will be available to New Zealand citizens and individuals domiciled in New Zealand—because we asked about the Pacific. We all know that the countries of the Realm they're eligible as New Zealand citizens. Of course it also applies the resale right to hold jointly all countries that we have agreement with—like the EU like the UK and like Australia. So if their descendants live in those countries they are also entitled to receive the royalty.This is a fair bill and it's about time that we get to this stage. I commend this bill to the House. Mālō 'aupito.
Warren-Clark AngieANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a real pleasure to speak on this bill the Retail Right for Visual Artists Bill. It came to the Social Services and Community Committee and we had a lot of interest from the community. We had 54 submissions and six oral submissions. That doesn't sound like a lot but actually they were fascinating submissions and I just want to start my contribution with a quote from Huia Hamon the daughter of the late Rei Hamon It is absolutely criminal that everyone else except the artist and their families make money from their artworks forever. With no mention no record keeping and the artist brunts all the taxes! I love this and it gives a lot of mana back to people that create and spread good vibes around the world through their artwork." I think that sums up a lot of the submissions we had although they were incredibly thoughtful as well and there were a lot of legal definitions. This bill does three things very simply and we have traversed this but I will very quickly say it establishes a scheme to ensure artists receive a royalty payment of 5 percent on resale of visual artwork. It authorises a ministerially appointed non-Government not-for-profit collection agency to manage and enforce the scheme and they can take a small admin fee for that service. The third thing it does is create a new source of income for visual artists. It's another way that this Government is supporting people with the cost of living.Artists in New Zealand have some of the lowest median incomes and we heard the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage speak about that. In 2008 we had the opportunity for this piece of legislation or a similar piece to be passed. The Hon Judith Tizard introduced a bill. It was voted down or it didn't proceed in the next Parliament when the National Party chose not to support it and continue it on. So this bill today at its second reading—and we have made some significant and sensible changes—brings us back in line with the 80-something countries out there and the rest of the world doing this work.My time is quite short. I'm mindful that we have a valedictory today but I would just like to acknowledge the support of the select committee—all members were incredibly engaged in this process—the submissions and our officials who helped us with some very curly questions. We got into all sorts of questions particularly about where people might live and how long these rights would last for and who might get the benefit of them etc. So with that I commend this bill to the House."
Whakatōhea Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading