edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Yang Jian: Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYang Jian: Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16389. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr JIAN YANG (National): I rise to support the Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill. This bill is related to a few key words. Firstly security—this bill is about oil security and oil security is closely linked to security generally. Secondly sustainability—this bill attempts to fund our oil security in a sustainable way. And finally reputation—New Zealand is a good international citizen and this bill will enable us to meet our international obligations. So I commend the bill to the House.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16386. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): It is my pleasure to take a brief call on the Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill and to support this bill. It is very difficult to continue after listening to that load of rubbish from the previous speaker Andrew Williams so I commend this bill to the House.
Vote: Environmental Reporting Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Environmental Reporting Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16375. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Environmental Reporting Bill be now read a first time.Ayes78New Zealand National 59; Green Party 14; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes41New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.
Goldsmith Paul: Environmental Reporting Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoldsmith Paul: Environmental Reporting Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16373. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): I am very disappointed to hear that Labour will not be supporting this excellent bill the Environmental Reporting Bill. I worked with Simon Upton many years ago when he was Minister for the Environment in 1997 or 1998 when we produced the first state of the environment report. I remember a great bit fat—Hon Trevor Mallard: He was known as Hansel at the time. Ruth was known as Gretel.PAUL GOLDSMITH: Yes well it is good to see the father of the House over there reminiscing about those days. It was a great big telephone book and a very powerful piece of work that was. We had high hopes and merry hearts that it would be the start of rigorous state of the environment reporting in this country. Of course history records that Labour took over afterwards and there was a lot of talk and very little action. When Labour finally did do something there were concerns about interference.This bill is about getting into the legislation and making it very clear that New Zealanders have credible robust independent environmental information set down in legislation so that we know where we are. Once we have a decent basis from which to work we can improve the quality of our environment. This is a party that actually does this stuff on the environment. Rather than just talking the talk we walk the walk. On that basis I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Barry Maggie: Environmental Reporting Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarry Maggie: Environmental Reporting Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16370. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): I rise with great pride to speak to the Environmental Reporting Bill. I think that what it does is it provides independence fairness and accuracy. These of course are completely alien notions to the member who has just resumed his seat Andrew Williams and to the Opposition parties in general.As Minister Adams said at the outset this is a significant change to the way that we report on our environment. I have to express surprise and disappointment at the way the Opposition parties’ members have questioned the integrity of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and who have also said that the Government Statistician is biased. These people ought to think very carefully about what they say. I think it is appalling to judge these two individuals and these two departments in the way that they have.We need to look at the track record of Labour. The exclusive economic zone is one of the great moments of shame amongst a tsunami of shame that Labour has been responsible for in the environment. I am astonished at how many people believe the myth that Labour is on the side of good environmental reporting or good governance of the environment because it manifestly is not. To give but one example—in the time that Labour was in Government for 9 long years 36 wells were drilled without any controls whatsoever. There was no attempt to put any checks and balances around it—no protections no governance no regulations. Labour members proceeded to make it even worse by voting down our exclusive economic zone legislation and they look likely to do it again with this Environmental Reporting Bill.I will put to the people of New Zealand that Labour the Greens and New Zealand First are not at all interested in the environment. This is a piece of legislation that will protect it and I commend it to the House. Thank you.
Vote: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16357. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Noes14Green Party 14.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.
Goldsmith Paul: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoldsmith Paul: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16356. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): National is ensuring that earthquake-prone buildings are dealt with in a timely manner by way of a nationally consistent system through this bill the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill. There is no magic here. Building strengthening like access work costs a lot of money and there are real-life trade-offs involved. Buildings could be abandoned businesses closed and jobs lost. On the other hand we are very concerned about greater public safety. These are very difficult trade-offs and this legislation is trying to provide a context for doing that in a rational and consistent manner.I do want to draw attention to the work that has been done before bringing in this bill. After listening to feedback during the consultation period the time for strengthening or demolishing has increased from 15 years which was originally proposed to 20 years from the legislation taking effect. There have been special provisions written in for heritage buildings being given potentially another 10 years and we do look forward to the Local Government and Environment Committee drilling down into the details of that over the next couple of months. On that basis I do commend this bill to the House.
Robertson H V Ross: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16354. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Just before I recognise the Hon Damien O’Connor this is to advise the House that this is a split call.
Barry Maggie: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarry Maggie: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16353. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): The purpose of the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill as others have outlined is really to strike that balance between making sure that buildings are safe against earthquakes and also that they are not terrifically expensive for the people who have got the buildings. There are a number of complicated issues around it many of which I see on a weekly basis in my own North Shore electorate.In Devonport we have a number of earthquake-prone buildings that need to be restored to heritage level and the integrity of the architecture has to be preserved. So as you would imagine that presents a number of challenges—many of them rather expensive challenges as well. So what needs to happen is we really have to clarify for the people who own these earthquake-prone buildings the threshold for defining what exactly an earthquake-prone building is. Is part of the building earthquake prone? Doesthe whole building need to be earthquake strengthened? These are the kinds of issues that people are grappling with and need some leadership on.The timing of course is contentious. Should we be doing this within a time frame of within 20 years or pushing it out to a longer limit? There are a number of various viewpoints you could take into account on that one and I guess affordability comes into play but again we must keep in mind that very important aspect of public safety. This is a very significant issue and it has a high level of public interest.It is estimated that between 15000 and 25000 buildings across New Zealand could be earthquake-prone. So it is something that we really need to do very carefully. We have to make sure that there are no unintended consequences and that people are not unfairly penalised but also that public safety is paramount. So by doing this we need to move to a system that has a significantly greater role for central government particularly in terms of providing leadership and direction. We need to make better use of the capability and resources of central and local government. In other words we all need to work together to make this bill the good piece of legislation that it is. Thank you.
Dean Jacqui: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16351. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Thank you very much. I get called that when I am being particularly bad which is not often to be fair. The issue of managing earthquake-prone buildings is quite acute down in the Waitaki electorate and in particular in my home town of Ōāmaru which is well-known and nationally recognised as having particularly beautiful heritage buildings. None the less we absolutely accept the recommendations of the royal commission finding into earthquake-prone buildings. We have to listen to those recommendations because history has told us in the most cruel of ways over the last couple of years that buildings can indeed be deadly. That iswhy I fully support the intent of this Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill which is to put in place a regime for assessing and monitoring buildings against national criteria and for requiring those earthquake-prone buildings to be brought up to a necessary level of safety so that both public safety and also people in their homes if they live in multi-storey buildings can feel safe in the event of a bad earthquake.This is a good bill. I support it to the select committee.
Robertson H V Ross: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16351. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I call the honourable member Jacqueline Dean.
Carter David: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: General Debate[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16343. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I think the document has been described. I suspect it is actually relatively easy to source but I am in a very generous mood. I will put the leave. Leave is sought to table this particular document from the website of the company. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Robertson Grant: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: General Debate[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16343. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I said that I would table a document at the end of my speech so I seek leave to table a document from the Oravida website—it is not easy to obtain—from June 2012 about a visit from the Shanghai municipality to New Zealand—
Hayes Joanne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16335. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.JOANNE HAYES (National) to theMinister of Corrections: What steps has the Government taken to improve access to alcohol and drug treatment for prisoners?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Corrections): I am very pleased to advise the House that there has been a rise of almost 1500 percent in places on drug and alcohol treatment programmes since 2008 for prisoners in public prisons. This financial year over 3700 prisoners will have access to treatment for their addictions rising to 4700 next year. This compares with just 234 prisoners having access to that same treatment in the final year of the previous Labour-led Government. This Government has expanded the number of specialist drug treatment units in prisons from six to nine and has significantly increased the capacity of these units. In addition we have also introduced new brief and intermediary programmes in all prisons to ensure those prisoners who need treatment for their drug addiction receive it.Joanne Hayes: Why is the Government focused on increasing alcohol and drug treatment in prisons?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Alcohol and drug addiction is a major driver of crime. Over half of all prisoners have addiction problems when they enter prison. If we can get them off the drugs and give them some job skills and education to find work on release we reduce the risk of them going on to commit further crimes. That is why this Government is focused on increasing the drug and alcohol treatment in our prisons as part of our plan to reduce reoffending by 25 percent. This work is delivering results with a reduction in reoffending of nearly 12 percent since 2011 meaning nearly 8700 fewer victims.
Foster-Bell Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16335. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National) to theMinister of Health: What investment is the Government making in improving nutrition and exercise for pre-schoolers?Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health): Thousands of Waikato preschoolers are now benefiting from a healthy nutrition and activity programme Under 5 Energize developed with $1.1 million of Government anti-obesity funding. Around a hundred early childhood centres in the Waikato are now involved with the Under 5 Energize programme which supports healthy eating and the development of fundamental movement skills for children. It is part of a wider programme investing in maternal and newborn nutrition as recommended by Sir Peter Gluckman.Paul Foster-Bell: What changes have centres involved with the Under 5 Energize project made?Hon TONY RYALL: Last week I visited Fairfield Kindergarten in Hamilton with David Bennett and Tim Macindoe which has been involved with Under 5 Energize and there has been a marked difference in the types of food coming in with the kids. The staff were also able to identify that their children felt restricted by bad weather when wanting to play outside so the kindergarten has now purchased wet-weather gear so that the kids are able to play outside in bad weather. They are also bringing fruit to kindy to share and drinking water is encouraged. It is a very good effort—I am looking forward to the evaluation—and another investment under this National-led Government.
Draft transcript - Tuesday 27 May 2014Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Tuesday 27 May 2014
Draft transcript - Thursday 29 May 2014Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Thursday 29 May 2014
Draft transcript - Wednesday 28 May 2014Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Wednesday 28 May 2014
Draft transcript - Thursday 22 May 2014Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Thursday 22 May 2014
Draft transcript - Wednesday 21 May 2014Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Wednesday 21 May 2014
Draft transcript - Tuesday 20 May 2014Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Tuesday 20 May 2014
Draft transcript - Friday 16 May 2014Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Friday 16 May 2014
Draft transcript - Thursday 15 May 2014Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Thursday 15 May 2014
Tisch Lindsay: Electoral Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Electoral Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16317. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member but the time has come for me to report progress.Progress reported.Report adopted.
Street Maryan: Electoral Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStreet Maryan: Electoral Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16317. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour): I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this legislation the Electoral Amendment Bill. There has been a lot of to-ing and fro-ing in the Chamber about where this bill has got to. I would like to just go back in a calm and measured way to the Supplementary Order Papers that are in front of us. It is true that the report from the Justice and Electoral Committee returned the bill to the House with certain clauses struck out—clauses that the Minister of Justice had included in the draft of the bill and to which she spoke in her introductory speech on the bill. I would like to appeal to the Minister to consider supporting and having National support those Supplementary Order Papers that reinstate her original intentions. Her original intention as far as I understand it was that the enrolment—
Tisch Lindsay: Electoral Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Electoral Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16317. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): That is not a point of order because someone has just moved a closure motion and I did not get a chance to accept it or reject it before the point of order came.Hon Maryan Street: Mr Chairperson—The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): The Hon Maryan Street.
Street Maryan: Electoral Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStreet Maryan: Electoral Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16317. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I have been waiting for a turn to speak. I have a Supplementary Order Paper that I have not had an opportunity to speak to yet and I would like that opportunity.
Ross Jami-Lee: Electoral Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Electoral Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16317. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Simpson Scott: Electoral Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSimpson Scott: Electoral Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16314. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): I moveThat the question be now put.
Horan Brendan: Electoral Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Electoral Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16312. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent): What a vibrant speech by that member the Hon Phil Goff. I especially liked the part about needing good independent people.I take a first call on Part 1 of the Electoral Amendment Bill. In this brief call I would like to focus on Supplementary Order Paper 415 in my name. It is a technical non-controversial amendment and I thank the parties that have indicated they will support it. This bill cancels the registration of logos of unregistered parties and there is broad support for that. Supplementary Order Paper 415 changes the date on which that will happen and it provides for a period of 4 months for parties with a registered logo to complete the registration of the party.There are several parties for which this is an issue. I declare an interest here because the New Zealand Independent Coalition is one of those. Our logo was registered by the Electoral Commission on 28 February 2014 and we are currently in the process of signing up members. It is amazing the number of former New Zealand First members who are flocking to it. Another such party is the Internet Party and there are other unregistered parties that may be about to apply for registration. Thrive New Zealand may be one of those as it registered a logo last August.This is a technical Supplementary Order Paper around timing. It will have no impact on the conduct of the election.Denis O’Rourke: He’s a comedian.Tracey Martin: Should be on the telly.BRENDAN HORAN: It is nice to hear those New Zealand First MPs finally speak up. They could not speak up too much when people were being sacked in their office. It will have no impact on the outcome of the election no matter what is said by anyone is this place. That will be determined by New Zealanders who vote. I commend this Supplementary Order Paper to the Committee.
Tisch Lindsay: Electoral Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Electoral Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): This is debate on clauses 3 to 56 and the schedule.
Vote: Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill be now read a third time.Ayes64New Zealand National 59;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes57New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Bill read a third time.
Collins Judith: Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCollins Judith: Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) on behalf of theMinister of Finance: I moveThat the Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill be now read a third time.
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Sorry to interrupt the honourable member. The time for this debate has expired.Report noted.
McKelvie Ian: Financial Review Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Financial Review Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16304. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IANMcKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): One could tear that last speech from Damien O’Connor apart with a chainsaw but instead I will take it apart gradually. There has never been a time in New Zealand when the primary industries have performed better than they are doing now. One has only to look at the dairy sector the wood sector even the sheep meat sector—they are performing outstandingly well. This Government—Dr David Clark: They don’t like what’s going on at Invermay.IANMcKELVIE: No but of course what is going on in theManawatū is very different. This Government has put much energy into the restructure of the Ministry forPrimary Industries to enable food safety the land-based productive sector biosecurity and fishing to operate in a—
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16286. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable Minister. The time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.Report noted.
Robertson H V Ross: Financial Review Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Financial Review Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16254. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): I am looking to recognise some honourable member.Hon David Parker: Mr Chairman.The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Ah! I call the Hon David Parker.
Robertson H V Ross: Financial Review Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Financial Review Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16253. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson):Tēnā koutou e te Whare engā iwi engā reo engā hau ewhā.Tēnā koutoutēnā koutoutēnā koutou katoa. Greetings honourable members. The House is in Committee on the Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill. This debate is the Committee stage of the Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill and the time allowed for this debate is 4 hours and comprises two distinct elements. The first is the debate on the annual Financial Statements of the Government as reported on by the Finance and Expenditure Committee. Once this has concluded the Committee debates individual financial reviews of departments Offices of Parliament and non-departmental appropriations as reported on by the select committees. The debate on the Government’s financial position may be a fairly wide-ranging one but the debates on the individual financialreviews of departments Offices of Parliament and non-departmental appropriations should be relevant to their performance in the 2012-13 financial year and their current operations.The compendium of financial reviews and non-departmental appropriations available for debate is on the Table. A member other than the responsible Minister may have no more than two calls on each financial review. At the conclusion of the debate a single question is put on the provisions of the bill. There is no amendment to or debate on this question. When the Chairperson reports the bill to the House it is set down for third reading forthwith. There is no debate on the third reading.Will members please turn to the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the annual Financial Statements of the Government. The question before the Committee is that the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the annual Financial Statements of the Government for the year ended 30 June 2013 be noted. I note that this report also relates to the Finance and Expenditure Committee’s financial review of Treasury so the performance in the 2012-13 financial year and current operations of Treasury may also be debated.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — KiwiRail—Asbestos in Locomotives Southern District Health Board—IT System Outage Household Incomes—Treasury EstimatesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — KiwiRail—Asbestos in Locomotives Southern District Health Board—IT System Outage Household Incomes—Treasury Estimates[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16253. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members I have received a letter from Darien Fenton seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the discovery of asbestos in a KiwiRail locomotive. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The dangers of asbestos are well known. KiwiRail is carrying out urgent testing to ensure staff safety and the locomotives themselves will not run until they have been confirmed to be safe. In these circumstances I am not convinced that I would be justified in setting aside the business of the House for a debate today. The application is therefore declined.I have also received a letter from the Hon Annette King seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the failure of Southern District Health Board’s information technology systems. This too is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The test for whether a particular case requires the immediate attention of the House is a high one. Although there was some inconvenience to outpatients the system was restored and a review is promised by the district health board. I am not convinced that the situation is such that an urgent debate is warranted today. The application is therefore declined.I have received a further application from the Hon David Parker seeking to debate Treasury’s miscalculation of the levels of disposable income of New Zealand’s households. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. I might have been inclined to accept this application except for the fact that today the House has before it the financial review debate. This provides the opportunity to debate the financial statements of the Government and the performance and current operation of Treasury. In these circumstances I am not convinced that I would be justified in setting aside the business of the House for a debate today. The application is therefore declined.
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16252. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to theMinister of Commerce: What decisions have been made on crowd funding following the passage of the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013?Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister of Commerce): Cabinet has approved regulations forcrowdfunding as part of the Government’s financial markets overhaul.Crowdfunding provides a platform where contributors receive shares in the businesses they invest in providing a new avenue for early stage growth and capital and to source the risk capital they need to grow. I have decided that there will be no investor caps for equitycrowdfunding other than the previously announced $2 million cap that one company can raise throughcrowdfunding each year. This is an exciting development for both start-up businesses and investors. With the regulations coming into force on 1 April this year New Zealand will lead Asia-Pacific in the development ofcrowdfunding.Jonathan Young: What reports has he seen that are supportive of the decisions made aboutcrowdfunding?Hon CRAIG FOSS: I have seen a number of reports supportive of the decisions made to enablecrowdfunding. I am encouraged to see a number of firms that have expressed an interest in taking up opportunities in thecrowdfunding space and that acknowledge that the changes are an exciting development in New Zealand. Implementing the Financial Markets Conduct Act is a key component of this Government’s Business Growth Agenda to help build New Zealand’s capital markets and drive business growth and jobs.Hon Damien O’Connor: What action has the Minister undertaken to protect the reputation of New Zealand’s capital markets given the publicly voiced concerns and anofficial complaint by an international investor relating to possible insider trading of Fonterra units on the NZX? What has he done?Hon CRAIG FOSS: That is a stretch from the original primary question. But if any individual has concerns about such matters NZX is of course obliged to administer and look into such matters. Of course the Financial Markets Authority has ultimate oversight over NZX.
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16250. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.NICKY WAGNER (National—Christchurch Central) to theMinister of Education: What recent announcements has she made on the Greater Christchurch Education Renewal Programme?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): I am delighted to report to the House that we have accepted the Aranui community’s recommendation for a years 1 to 13 school and community campus. In Rolleston we are responding to the significant population growth in the area the community’s need for more schools and their preferred configuration. This will include another primary school and a new secondary school to be built over the next 2 to 3 years. These schools will be modern learning environments with flexible learning areas. They will ensure a great education for children and young people in the areas of Rolleston and Aranui.Nicky Wagner: How have the Rolleston and Aranui communities been involved in this process?Hon HEKIA PARATA: I am pleased with the very consultative process that has been followed with both communities and I thank them for their valuable input and continuing involvement in these schools. In Aranui we established a community group to lead the first phase of consultation which has provided extensive feedback and ideas for the schooling organisation and the facilities and services that the campus will provide. They have galvanised community support for a new education vision for Aranui and I thank them all for that.Nicky Wagner: What other progress is being made on the Greater Christchurch Education Renewal Programme?Hon HEKIA PARATA: Of the $1.137 billion for the Christchurch renewal programme $30 million is being spent this year and a further $100 million will be spent next year. The new Pegasus school will open on schedule for the start of term 2 this year. The newHalswell Primary School will open for the start of term 4 this year. New builds for the merged schools are on schedule and rebuilds for Linwood College Hornby High School and Hillmorton High School for their new year 7 to year 8 cohorts are on track. This Government has always been committed to Christchurch and I am delighted that we are making great progress on the education front. We will continue to work hard on our investment of $1.137 billion over the next 10 years. There is excellent momentum.Dr Megan Woods: Does she now consider that there has been meaningful consultation with thePhillipstown School community following the High Court’s ruling that her original decision was unlawful and has she been asked byPhillipstown for more time to consult and/or more information?Hon HEKIA PARATA: Yes and yes.
Horan Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16249. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.BRENDAN HORAN (Independent) to theMinister of Energy and Resources: Does he stand by all his statements regarding iron sand seabed mining; if so why?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Acting Minister of Energy and Resources): Yes in the context in which they were given.Brendan Horan: Can the Minister explain how giving Trans-Tasman Resources research and development grants of up to $15 million over 3 years to take New Zealand’s ironsand from the seabed makes any sense at all when that company estimates its royalty payments would be up to only US$8 million per year and the addition of research and development grants would effectively cut its royalty payments to less than 1 percent?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: That is actually the responsibility of the Minister of Science and Innovation but helpfully the Minister has been speaking to that Minister. The research and development growth grants that this particular company has obtained are of course for around 20 percent of its actual research and development expenditure. It has to provide the other 80 percent. So I suspect the member’s numbers are wrong and his assumptions are wrong. But I could perhaps quote from the media release that the company put out when it actually received the grant saying that “it hoped that the grant will help it develop a world-class iron sands export business that will employ approximately 250 people and increase New Zealand’s GDP by $300 million.” Of course those are the assertions of the company and we have got to wait to see whether they come true but should they do that then it would be of great benefit to New Zealand.Brendan Horan: Taking into account the research and development grants how can the Minister justify the ecological and environmental risk along with the loss to New Zealand of minerals that have accumulated over millions of years for a paltry royalty payment by Trans-Tasman Resources equating to just about two houses per year on MountMaunganui’s Marine Parade?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I think unfortunately that the member shows a lack of interest once again like a lot of members on that side of the House in jobs and growth for New Zealanders. This is about encouraging an opportunity—Hon Member: Answer the question.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: —I am—for a resource business to grow jobs in this country. In terms of the environmental impact that is being properly assessed by the Environmental Protection Authority and the process is under way at the moment but should that be OK then this Government would welcome the jobs that come with such a project.Brendan Horan: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister has previously confirmed that there is no local labour content in any—Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the member wants to raise a point of order he should do so. If he wants to continue a debate on this matter this is not the forum to do so.
Yang Jian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYang Jian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16248. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.Dr JIAN YANG (National) to theMinister of Health: What progress can he report on the Government’s health targets for district health boards?Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health): The Government has set six national targets to provide focus for district health boards and primary care networks to address key areas to improve health services for New Zealanders. The House will be aware that the Government and clinicians set a target that patients would be admitted discharged or transferred from an emergency department within 6 hours for 95 percent of patients. In the last quarter the result was 94 percent. This is the highest result ever since thetargets began. The doctors and nurses in emergency departments across the country supported by their colleagues in the hospitals are providing faster health-care than ever before.Dr Jian Yang: What were the other important results in the latest health targets data?Hon TONY RYALL: Yes more good news. The district health boards delivered almost 80000 elective surgery discharges—3500 more than planned. All cancer patients who were ready for treatment waited less than 4 weeks for radiotherapy or chemo and almost a million heart and diabetes checks have been carried out over the monitored period. Health professionals across New Zealand deserve our thanks for this real improvement in health services.Hon Annette King: What progress or otherwise did Statistics New Zealand report in its recentNew Zealand in Profile: 2014 overview on the cost of an adult visit to the doctor? Did it show a 24 percent increase in the cost since 2008—almost 5 percent a year—under his watch?Hon TONY RYALL: I do not have that information with me but what I can tell the member is that this Government has provided increased subsidies for GPs year on year on year.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Somewhat surprisingly the Minister told us he did not have that information. I think he has addressed the question inadequately as it is.Mr SPEAKER: I think that on this occasion the member is absolutely right.
Banks John: Motions — Ukraine—Russian Military Action in CrimeaText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBanks John: Motions — Ukraine—Russian Military Action in Crimea[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16237. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JOHN BANKS (Leader—ACT): The ACT Party joins with others in this House to support this motion. We condemn what appears to be a brazen breach of international law by the Russian Federation in the Crimean Peninsula. The President of the Russian Federation says that Russia’s concern is for the safety of her many citizens in the Crimea. The correct course of action is for the Russian Federation to pursue bilateral negotiations with the Ukrainian Government to ensure the safety of its Russian citizens. The Russian Federation also has multilateral options to ensure that the safety of her citizens in the Crimea is a global concern.However none of these options have been exercised. Instead what we appear to have is an old fashioned 19thcentury land-grab. If the Russian Federation wishes to maintain a position of influence and respect among the communities of States then she must uphold the rule of law in international affairs. The people of an independent and intact Ukraine must feel free to chart the future course for their country without military interference from immediate neighbours.Motion agreed to.
Dunne Peter: Motions — Ukraine—Russian Military Action in CrimeaText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDunne Peter: Motions — Ukraine—Russian Military Action in Crimea[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16237. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future): United Future also supports the motion that has been moved by the Minister of Foreign Affairs this afternoon but notes with a degree of trepidation the rather unusual circumstances that we face. This is not the classic situation of one country invading another. There are legitimate issues that the people of Ukraine have to expect to see resolved in respect of their territoriality and their sovereignty. But there is also the long historical association of Greater Russia and there is also I think lurking behind all of this the question of Russia’s prestige in today’s world and the prospect of precipitate action on either side leading to a reinstitution of the norms of the Cold War. This is a time for considered response.I believe that the motion the Minister has moved is in that vein but it would be inappropriate as other speakers have suggested or implied to move to a further stage in this confrontation without allowing the parties directly involved the opportunity themselves to talk to negotiate and to reach a settlement that will be in the long-term interests of both. This is not an Iraq into Kuwait - type situation. It is not even the United States trying to tidy up what it saw as the situation in Iraq. It is like no other situation we have confronted in recent years and therefore it is important that in seeking to address it the international community acts deliberately but also acts in a way that will lead to a viable long-term solution and not the engraining of a deep-seated tension that will simply play out slowly but surely with mounting bitterness over the years ahead.
Peters Winston: Motions — Ukraine—Russian Military Action in CrimeaText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Motions — Ukraine—Russian Military Action in Crimea[Sitting date: 04 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16236. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): New Zealand First supports this motion and joins other parties in expressing deep concern over the crisis in Ukraine.Although New Zealand is far removed geographically from the region developments in Ukraine have cast a shadow on international relations on a much broader scale because as we know from history—and history is seriously relevant here—events sometimes take on a momentum of their own. A miscalculation in times of crisis can spiral into disaster. Ukraine faces great challenges in developing a strong and resilient young democracy. No one should ever underestimate that task. But the people of Ukraine have a right to determine their own destiny free of external interference. NewZealand First joins the call on all parties to the crisis to exercise restraint at this critical time.