edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2024–25 Emergency Response and Remedial Measures) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 102New Zealand National 49; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.Noes 14Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Tana.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.ANDY FOSTER (NZ First): Point of order. They clearly said 13 votes and we're sort of going Well why 14?"DEPUTY SPEAKER: Fourteen.Hon Member: Darleen Tana.ANDY FOSTER: She said 13.Hon Kieran McAnulty: Obviously 13 plus one is 14 mate. Come on.ANDY FOSTER: Yeah well it's actually 14 plus one which is 15.DEPUTY SPEAKER: I'm satisfied that the voting has been counted. If the member has any other concerns we'll have a look at it.Andy Foster: Oh I just think you should check the Hansard.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yeah.SUZE REDMAYNE (Junior Whip—National): I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I just wanted to clarify that I do think the member voted 13 twice so I just wonder if there's reason they're voting 13—that it's not a mistake that's maybe what she wants recorded.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well that's up to the Green Party.SUZE REDMAYNE: But that's what they said but you've recorded 14.DEPUTY SPEAKER: No—the Green Party voted 13 and Darleen Tana voted; that's where the 14 comes from. OK so the Clerk has announced—[Interruption] OK; silence please! The Clerk has announced the bill's first reading so the question now is that the—[Interruption] quiet please! The question is that The Taxation (Annual Rates for 2024–25 Emergency Response and Remedial Measures) Bill be considered by the Finance and Expenditure Committee.Motion agreed to.Bill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee."
Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Kia orana Madam Speaker. Look it's a pleasure to rise and take what will be a brief call and contribution on this bill. It's one that we do support because as the member who's just resumed his seat indicated it was one that we introduced because we saw that there was an issue and this was a way in which this particular issue could be fixed. The fact of the matter is that when we look at the issue of litigation most people in our community would think and expect that those who are involved in litigation do so with good intent and good intentions but the reality is that there are some in our community for whom they utilise litigation for other means and other purposes to perhaps not seek justice which is what this is all about but to rather try and continue to exert a level of control harassment or just being able to continue to have some level of communication or contact with those who in many circumstances sadly are their victims.What this bill seeks to do in one particular element is it allows the presiding officer of proceedings to actually adopt a fairly broad view when it concerns the issue of an individual's conduct. So rather than looking at a form of behaviour or conduct in isolation this bill will empower those judicial officers who are making decisions to actually step back if they need to and to look at a broader range. If there are sustained patterns of behaviour that would give them rise to take a particular course of action rather than looking at just the one issue of behaviour in isolation on its own merits. So this bill will amend a number of pieces of legislation that relate to courts within the hierarchy of courts really in New Zealand to achieve that. But it's also important that the bill as I understand it introduces a new section 12B into the Family Court Act. We're looking at Family Court judges who let's face it often deal with circumstances and cases that are extremely difficult that relate to familial relations whether those are wanted or unwanted in some circumstances. This will give the Family Court judge presiding over a matter the authority to basically call a halt or a stop to proceedings if they think that a party to proceedings is actually using that process as a way of abusing the system. So those are just two examples but it is great to see that this is well supported across the House. I commend this bill to the House.
Leary IngridINGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri): It's great to have so much cross-party support for this important piece of legislation. It's excellent to see the survivors of family violence being supported in this way. But I have to say as mental health Opposition spokesperson it would be better to see more support for the mental health elements that concern family violence and particularly with the links to suicide. So doing this one tweak while it's good it's not going to solve some of the problems.We've heard a lot about what the bill does but I think it's timely in a way just to be aware of some of the statistics which link family violence through to suicide that have come out from Women's Refuge. This is important because it shows how important it is to have a bill like this that supports survivors of violence. Each year more women die of suicide than of homicide. Suicide after family violence is one of the leading causes of death in New Zealand and about half of women accessing mental health services have experienced current or recent family violence according to Women's Refuge. And so I would like to acknowledge the 47000 people who die globally each year from family violence the nine women and the two men on average that die each year. I say this because we need to strengthen all areas that can support the wellbeing including the mental wellbeing of families so that they are not made more vulnerable. This goes one step but we need to see far more support because what we have seen from this Government is the pulling apart of the Suicide Prevention Office. We've seen gaps in responses to 111 calls which often emanate from family violence situations where we don't know who's going to be there to pick up the pieces. Will it be the police or others? We've seeing no workforce plan yet in the mental health sector and we have a Minister that doesn't know what his budget is. So great to have the piece of legislation. I look forward to this Government looking at the totality of the links between family violence suicide and mental health so that we can get some real progress in this area.
Nakhle RimaRIMA NAKHLE (National—Takanini): Madam Speaker thank you. I too would like to share my support for this bill the Victims of Family Violence (Strengthening Legal Protections) Legislation Bill. We're in the second reading and I tautoko what my colleagues around the House have been expressing about this bill. I'd like to turn our attention to the key themes that emerged from the submissions during the Justice Committee stage. These five things were that litigation abuse is indeed an issue access to justice needs to be maintained for both parties children's welfare and best interests need to be considered there are concerns that measures could harm victims and systematic change is needed to enhance the protections the bill offers. Here I'd like to just highlight one of the submissions by Backbone Collective. They submitted that in their 2017 Family Court survey involving 496 victims/survivors who had been involved in Family Court proceedings 50 percent said that they experienced litigation abuse. So this amendment bill is absolutely needed and indeed with our victim-centric approach this will help make sure that victims are put at the forefront when it comes to addressing their needs and their concerns. It's to strengthen the court's ability to respond to litigation abuse. I commend this bill to the House.
Bates CarlCARL BATES (National—Whanganui): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's my absolute privilege to stand this afternoon and speak to the first reading of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2024–25 Emergency Response and Remedial Measures) Bill. Not only did we campaign hard to ensure that we were in a position here this afternoon to be able to introduce this legislation to the House and ensure that after 14 long years New Zealanders get the tax relief that they deserve as a chartered accountant myself I'm particularly pleased that we are addressing this fundamental issue following the last opportunity we had to provide tax relief to New Zealanders that the Opposition got rid of a couple of years ago.This bill also allows the opportunity for under-16-year-olds to enrol in KiwiSaver with a single guardian's consent. Now when I started working at McDonald's a few years back I must say—probably more than it looks like—back then we started when we were 15 and to have started saving at that point would have been of benefit. We need to create the opportunity for more New Zealanders to plan for their future provide for their superannuation through building their KiwiSaver building those habits early on and we support them to do that through this component of the bill.Finally I'd just like to note the opportunity the bill provides around emergency response. It was just Friday a week ago in the wonderful Whanganui electorate that I did my civil defence training with Tim Crowe the local manager in Whanganui just looking at how we respond in those emergency moments. This bill supports part of that activity that we as a country need to have as part of our legislative arrangements to ensure we can respond effectively in emergencies. I commend this bill to the House.
Boyack RachelRACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to take a short call on theTaxation (Annual Rates for 2024–25 Emergency Response and Remedial Measures) Bill. Before I begin my contribution can I just indulge the House by welcoming to Parliament this afternoon the Avondale College gospel choir and their director Seumanu Simon Matāfai. They are here for this weekend's Big Sing Finale choral competition. It is the first time they have made it to the finale one of 24 choirs from 250 who entered across Aotearoa and they have just sung for us in the west gallery. So welcome to Parliament to all of you today. Now I'll talk to the bill. Thank you Madam Speaker for indulging me briefly. This bill is very important because it does clarify our taxation arrangements for the country as they currently stand. We have noted through a number of speeches today that it is at its first reading and so this will go to select committee. There will be a number of things for the select committee to work through but as many speakers have noted today the piece that I am most interested in is that part around emergency response. We in Nelson where I am the MP have also had a number of civil defence emergencies in terms of fires in terms of floods where people's lives and livelihoods have been significantly disrupted. One of the things that occurred during the last Parliament following the cyclones was in the Governance and Administration Committee which I now have the pleasure of chairing. We did do a lot of emergency legislation. Now that wasn't specifically related to tax—not all of it—but one of the things that we have acknowledged in this Parliament I think is that every time we have a disaster we need to do bespoke legislation whether it be about tax whether it be about environmental measures or resource management measures. So we do need to move to a system where we have legislation that is already sitting there that doesn't need to go through a select committee process every single time we have an actual disaster. In terms of taxation measures for small businesses for sole traders for people who are interacting with the IRD who have tax obligations throughout that time it can be an incredibly stressful time when your business may have suffered a loss in revenue your business may have been flooded your business may have suffered from some other form of loss or disruption—to have measures in place to ensure that the Government doesn't add to that stress essentially. What Government needs to do during that time is support and enable people organisations businesses to be able to continue operating and to have as much normalcy in what is a chaotic and stressful time. So we started that work as a Labour Government. It's really good to see it continue in this bill. I think that the select committee will obviously take a good look at the bill and make the necessary changes. Labour is supporting it at this point to select committee and I commend it to the House.
Privilege — Consideration of Reports of Privileges Committee—Question of Privilege Concerning Investigations of Possible Breaches of Court Suppression Orders in Parliamentary Proceedings
Wedd CatherineCATHERINE WEDD (National—Tukituki): Look thank you for this opportunity to rise in support of this bill because on this side of the House we were always about less tax and ensuring that hard-working New Zealanders can keep more of what they earn. And of course after 14 years finally we have a Government which will be providing hard-working New Zealanders with tax relief But the area of this bill that I'm really interested in talking about in this short call and contribution that I will make today is those clauses in relation to emergency responses and providing tax relief really quickly and efficiently in an emergency. Of course we saw this over a year ago with Cyclone Gabrielle where my region was absolutely devastated. In a situation where we have a natural disaster like that it is really important that we get support out quickly and efficiently. We don't want to have to keep on coming back to the House here to legislate to ensure that we're getting that relief out. So this will ensure that we have tax relief quickly for businesses in an emergency. Of course whether it is the Christchurch earthquakes or Kaikōura or Cyclone Gabrielle I think it is good that we are acting now to ensure that we do have a piece of legislation that can work so that we can act quickly in these situations.I commend the Minister of Revenue for his quick moves to ensure that within just 10 months our Government is putting this tax legislation through and ensuring that we do have these mechanisms in place to enable tax relief quickly in an emergency. So well done to the Hon Simon Watts for identifying that.So without any further ado I would like to commend this bill to the House and I look forward to the select committee process where we will be able to deep dive into some of these issues a little further. Thank you.
Woods MeganHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'm pleased to take a very short call on this. My colleague the Hon Dr Deborah Russell has already set out Labour's position on this. We are supporting this bill to select committee. It is largely an administrative bill. Obviously the debate has been had around some of the tax rates that are contained in the bill and that was a debate that happened immediately post-Budget and clearly we didn't support those measures. But in terms of this bill what we are debating here there's a largely administrative set of measures that have been through a tax policy consultation process.I do want to pick up on one of those measures and one of the things that we are very keen to see progress. The speaker who's just taken his seat Stuart Smith referred to some of this in his contribution and that is work that Labour started when in Government around having that off-the-shelf set of tax measures that we put in place post-disaster. We had seen a series of events after the Canterbury earthquake sequence then another earthquake and then a cyclone that we had to come back for each event and basically reinvent the wheel and put in place the kinds of tax measures that would allow businesses to get through a period of time where they simply in many cases weren't either able to trade or were trading under very diminished circumstances. What are the things that through the tax system in a package of measures that you can wrap around communities and in this part the business community to ensure they can get through? Is it around a deferral of when tax needs to be paid and whole raft of measures to basically smooth the way? I think that us having a more centralised approach to that—something that after an event like this we can just pull off the shelf. And actually it also then gives businesses some sense that after a disaster they can know what to expect. It's not a will they won't they legislative bespoke set of measures to help my region or to help our area. What they can do is they can have a sense of what the expectation would be when something really interrupted the ability of a business to trade and that assistance was needed.So as we've indicated there is much that we need to discuss at select committee and we look forward to that discussion. There are many things that we need to go over. But on that note I am happy to commend this bill to the House.
Stephenson ToddTODD STEPHENSON (ACT): Well thank you Madam Speaker and thank you for that clarification because I'm actually going to make a few comments in response to our friend from the Greens as we discuss the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2024–25 Emergency Response and Remedial Measures) Bill. I'm happy to stand here on behalf of ACT. Obviously we will be supporting this to select committee. While the Hon Deborah Russell is correct; this constitutionally locks in the tax relief that we have delivered to New Zealanders I do want to talk about that briefly because what this Government has done this side of the House is actually deliver tax relief for New Zealanders after a number of years of not having more money in their pockets. That is what we're doing.In parallel to that—and this is really what I want to say to my colleague Julie Anne Genter—what we're actually doing is also interrogating Government spending making sure that every dollar that this Government spends is actually worthwhile so you actually can ensure that public services are being delivered and that the tax money that a bill like this is collecting is actually being done effectively. So yes we do have a totally different view of the world where we think the Government actually can be responsible not increase spending—some 80 percent actually we saw increase in spending with no increase in services actually delivered.So I am pleased that we will be supporting this bill to the select committee where it will get a rigorous going over. I'm a member of the Finance and Expenditure Committee and I know people like the Hon Deborah Russell who's got a lot of experience in taxation will be very thorough in her examination of this bill and I welcome that. Also this does make a number of other small changes which will actually be useful as the Minister of Revenue outlined.I also quite like on the explanatory note—it says that some of the proposals are aimed at improving [the] current settings within a broad-base low-rate framework. This framework helps … ensure the tax system is fair and efficient" and really is trying to not impede economic growth. Obviously in ACT we would like a much lower flatter tax rate but we're happy to work within the Government to try and deliver that over time because obviously—Cameron Brewer: Under your leadership—under your leadership.TODD STEPHENSON: Ha! Thank you Mr Brewer. But you know we are very happy to support this bill and we will continue to work constructively as we actually work towards a lower simpler tax system for New Zealand. So with that I commend this bill to the House. Thank you."
Rutherford TomTOM RUTHERFORD (National—Bay of Plenty): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to stand as the final speaker on this bill on the Courts (Remote Participation) Amendment Bill third reading just prior to it coming into law.I wanted to say that the court system is currently experiencing massive delays particularly in the criminal and family jurisdictions of the District Court. These delays are felt by all participants in the justice system but particularly the victims. Enabling more virtual participation in court proceedings contributes to the Government's objective of improving court performance generally. Virtual or remote participation when used appropriately can increase access to justice and support the efficient and timely resolution of court proceedings. We've heard about justice delayed is justice denied. I say to my colleagues to delay justice is injustice. So it gives me great pleasure to be the final speaker on this bill and I commend the bill to the House and into law.Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
Brewer Cameron; Kuriger BarbaraCAMERON BREWER (National—Upper Harbour): I'm very pleased to rise in support of the third reading of the Courts (Remote Participation) Amendment Bill and want to join the chorus of congratulating our Minister for Courts the Hon Nicole McKee who is also our associate justice Minister and is doing a terrific job with her portfolios right across her brief and she's not bad on Q+A either.It's remarkable that here on the last day of winter as far as our sitting goes our parliamentary last day of winter we come together as a House.Hon Dr Deborah Russell: It's always winter when you lot are in power.CAMERON BREWER: We come together Deborah in this House as one. And Deborah Russell I'm hoping with other legislation that the Hon Nicole McKee puts through the House that we'll also come together with unanimous support. I hope this is the beginning of something great.I also want to note that this is also a reflection of a positive aspect that came out—possibly one of the few—of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns which we saw as a society: faster enablement and enactment of remote participation whether it be in education in business in Parliament in community organisations and indeed now in the courts. This amendment as has been alluded to makes permanent a temporary change that we saw in 2020 with the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act. That will be repealed and this will be in place enabling as others have well canvassed more virtual participation in court proceedings which is the Government's objective of improving court performance generally.I commend the bill thank you.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Hon Willow-Jean Prime; this is a split call.
Costley TimTIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki): Good afternoon Madam Speaker. Well cautious support or wholehearted support I think it's something that the whole House should be doing. Look this is about improving the performance of our courts more generally and that's why I'm supporting it. We've heard from the other side. We heard from the Greens about the backlog in the courts. I think we've hit the bingo card of justice delayed is justice denied" but of course it's true and we do need to work our way through that.I do hear the concerns that were raised just before about the quality of audiovisual (AV) and the use of technology. Actually I think the considerations are a little broader than that. It's about how we use this appropriately and there will be instances where it's not appropriate or in fact it may not even be possible to use AV technology. But it's important that we bring these tools in that we continue to modernise that we continue to innovate and give our courts the tools that they need to do the job and as I read through this bill that's what I see. I see this as a great way of giving courts the option to use it where appropriate and that's why I commend this bill to the House."
Webb DuncanHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Kia ora. Thank you Mr Speaker and a pleasure to speak on this bill. Before I do might I just recognise Lucy Callaghan who's made some of these daffodils that some of us are wearing today. I know her family's been personally affected by cancer and this is her way of contributing. So well done Lucy.SPEAKER: We perhaps should have recognised that earlier in the day—it's a huge effort and I'm very pleased to wear one as well. Would anyone else like to stand up and show they're wearing them? [Members stand] That's very good thank you. That'll cover that. And that all comes out of your time of course.Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Very happy—very happy for that because I'm not going to take long. It is good that the Minister is bringing a bill—her first bill to completion that is supported across the House. I can confirm that that won't be the case for a number of other bills in her name.Look this is a good bill. It's a pragmatic bill. I do think you know I've expressed concerns in the committee stage of this House on this bill that the Minister responded to in a very fulsome way. The concerns about this bill are essentially that the technology won't keep up with the demands. I was assured by the Minister that in her executive capacity she's going to make sure that that happens and that there are processes in place. Practically we're concerned that the rights of defendants; whilst written in the law they've got a right to attend in practice they might be encouraged not to attend court even if they want to. That's another important consideration. Also and probably most importantly for victims we want to make sure that this piece of legislation doesn't erode the right of victims should they choose to do so to essentially look the perpetrator the offender in the eye and see them at the different stages of the criminal proceedings. Of course importantly sentencing there's no suggestion that sentencing will occur in the absence of the perpetrator but other aspects of the proceedings as well.The bill itself—and I won't go through the details of it that's been done most ably by the Minister already. The bill itself does increase administrative efficiency but more importantly in many ways it increases the effectiveness and openness of the justice system so that more people can participate in it more easily. For that reason we will be supporting this bill.
Prime Willow-JeanHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker—just a short contribution on the third reading of the Courts (Remote Participation) Amendment Bill. I have listened to the entire debate and while the last speaker Cameron Brewer got quite excited and a bit carried away assuming or hoping that we might support some of the other legislation that the Minister for Courts is going to bring through that won't be the case.But in terms of this one I do want to acknowledge that there are good reasons for this bill being introduced—the improvements in efficiencies and access to justice and so on that we've heard. But I do really want to also add my caution to this House and to us all—that this doesn't become the default for our justice system that we don't see this being used more and more as a cost savings exercise that we don't see that this is a justification for any under-investment into our facilities and so on. So with that I just want to add my voice to the cautious support that we have for aspects of this bill. I commend it to the House.
Nakhle RimaRIMA NAKHLE (National—Takanini): Thanks Mr Speaker. I rise also to add my support to this bill the Courts (Remote Participation) Amendment Bill. I'd also love to start by congratulating the Minister for Courts the Hon Nicole McKee for this being your first bill which you've taken through from genesis to now hopefully the end.James Meager: Oh genesis again!RIMA NAKHLE: Yes the genesis. So thank you for shepherding this bill.To our listeners at home including my beautiful husband—well he's at work—what we're doing here today is essentially the third reading where we're allowing more remote participation to take place in our courts. [Changeover in presiding officers] Welcome Madam Speaker.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you.RIMA NAKHLE: In essence this amendment bill is what we call an omnibus bill" where it's a combination of more than one bill where the effect the ultimate goal is the single broad policy. In this situation it's implementing these amendments in this bill to increase remote participation in court proceedings.Now there's a lot that has been said about this bill. Here I'd like to acknowledge our very able and excellent chair of the Justice Committee James Meager.Before I wrap up the third speech on this bill I would like to highlight the Disabled Persons Assembly (New Zealand) submission which I didn't get to highlight last time in the second reading. What they said is: "Covid has highlighted the importance of remote participation … Remote participation also allows disabled people to participate more effectively in multiple avenues that have previously been inaccessible to them." I'm glad that they feel this way about this amendment.I'm looking forward to this becoming enacted into law. We commend this bill to the House."
Paul TamathaTAMATHA PAUL (Green—Wellington Central): Kia ora Mr Speaker. Thank you for allowing us to get up and support this bill which I understand has support across the House. I really just want to reaffirm the statements that we made last week on the second reading of this bill to say that yep the Greens support this bill. We think the key benefit from this bill is that it will allow people who have been victims of harm to be able to observe proceedings from a space that makes them feel safe whether that's at home or with their family or with their friends or anywhere that allows them to be safe and to prevent that physical contact between themselves and the perpetrators of the abuse.We noted that this might improve the court backlogs that are currently being experienced by the courts. Repeating a fact that I made last week that when I looked into the court backlogs I found that 142000 court events have been delayed because of the pandemic since March 2020. And that's 142000 court events out of 2.4 million appearances for sentencings bail applications and pretrial hearings. When I looked into the psychological impact on those backlogs for people who have been harmed and are awaiting their time in court I found this quote from a survivor of sexual violence Rosie Veldkamp who said My mental health was getting worse. I was just always upset and honestly felt like it was never going to happen." I know that waiting for the trial can be quite psychologically harmful for people who have been victims.There's not a whole lot more to add about this bill. I think it's pretty straightforward. I guess the only thing we wanted to raise too is that yep this bill presents benefits for victims who are participating in the justice system and in the courts and there have been many recommendations about other ways that we can improve our courtrooms to make them less traumatising less triggering for people who have experienced harm. Some other suggestions that have been made to have a trauma-informed approach to courtrooms include lowering the judge's bench to not have it towering over survivors well-lit car parks warm and welcoming artwork making sure that there are safe blocked-off waiting areas for survivors as well as having secure entrances and exits to courtrooms. Some survivors have even called on the courts to implement totally separate facilities for victims in the courthouse to keep them away from perpetrators.So there isn't a whole lot more to add to this bill except to say it's great that we can have a moment of unity. We support the bill and kia ora koutou katoa."
McLellan TraceyDr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'm more than happy to take a very quick call on the Courts (Remote Participation) Amendment Bill. Labour supports this bill as has already been said mainly because it's a relatively simple and straightforward way to modernise our judicial system. It lends itself to the pilot so to speak that was done via the COVID-19 pandemic which like in various other sectors provided us with some genuine innovation and some examples of things that we could do better in the future. Therefore I commend the Minister for Courts and all those involved in ensuring that this is one of those areas.Having said that though as has been mentioned by several other speakers there's obviously some things to keep our eye on not the least of which is to make sure that it doesn't just get used conveniently and as the default and when it is contrary to the best interests of all those involved but particularly those victims who may want to have their day in court so to speak and not wish to utilise this process. So one of the risks that we've heard other people talk about as I said is that it would become the default. So it is incumbent upon us to watch that process quite closely and to ensure that it doesn't just end up being a bit of a cost saving measure. We also have to be cautious as my Green Party colleague has just said that the suitable resources are invested in this domain to make sure that the tech is available to make sure that it's well maintained that it's capable of doing what it needs to do to meet that demand. But having said that I commend this bill to the House.
Ngarewa-Packer Debbie; Brownlee GerryDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori): Thank you and my apologies for the misunderstanding and I thank the House for their support. First of all [Authorised reo Māori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.][Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]Te Pāti Māori stands to acknowledge the Speaker's decision at the time and to acknowledge the mahi of the Privileges Committee. We received that and have been more aware and respectful obviously of the decision of principle of comity and acknowledge the process for Standing Order 116. We acknowledge the decision and the reminder of the Parliament's relationship with the court and the utmost constitutional importance of that respect. I guess—given the week that we've had with the decisions or the comments with politicians calling judges communist—it's probably a good timely reminder for us all politically. We acknowledge that the public has the right to know. We acknowledge what suppression orders are about. We also acknowledge the decisions of needing to know now and the suppression orders used to protect victims. And also acknowledge the fact that suppression orders aren't always used as the fact that a person is well-known is not lightly a reason why I guess suppression orders continue. We acknowledge also as Te Pāti Māori that if and when suppression orders are lifted that is the appropriate time to talk about it. Ngā mihi kia ora.SPEAKER: I don't think we need to put that vote again because the House has dealt with that. I thank the member for that contribution.
McAnulty Kieran; Brownlee GerryPoints of Order—Te Reo Māori Simultaneous Interpretation in the ChamberHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour): Point of order Mr Speaker. Thank you very much Mr Speaker. I waited until the end of question time because I didn't want to interrupt but with the translations there was often a lag. We were still trying to hear the end of the answer when the next question had been called. So just for next time if we could have a minor delay so that we could hear the entirety of the answer before the next question is called.SPEAKER: That's fair enough. Some of it I was picking up and probably you will recall I did say to Willie Jackson there was a need to wait for a few seconds. And I think yeah we can do that in the future if it is going to be more prominently used.
9. Question No. 9—ForestryDANA KIRKPATRICK (National—East Coast) to the Minister of ForestryQuestion No. 9—Forestry9. DANA KIRKPATRICK (National—East Coast) to the Minister of Forestry: What action has the Government taken in respect of forestry and the clean-up of the East Coast?Hon TODD McCLAY (Minister of Forestry): As everybody will know last year the East Coast region was significantly impacted by severe weather events including Cyclone Gabrielle which left around 1 million tonnes of woody debris including whole trees scattered in the catchment along beaches and rivers posing ongoing risk across the region. To date the Government has provided $110 million for the treatment of woody debris and sediment in Tairāwhiti. This includes $27 million additionally that was announced in Budget 2024. Yesterday I visited Gisborne to announce the Government would establish the Tairāwhiti Forestry Action Group so the forestry sector and Gisborne District Council can work more closely together to clean up the East Coast.Dana Kirkpatrick: What is the primary objective of the Tairāwhiti Forestry Action Group?Hon TODD McCLAY: Well the action group will focus on speeding up the clean-up of existing wood and slash as well as action to reduce the risk of wood that is still likely to come down from the hills. The action group includes representatives from the Gisborne District Council forestry companies and contractors the farming sector and iwi. It brings together the right expertise to accelerate clean-up and deliver ongoing positive outcomes for the region. This is an important next step to ensure work is done on practical initiatives to clean up more wood more quickly reduce risk and implement best practice for the forestry industry. It's important that taxpayers can have confidence that Government funding is being used effectively. The action group will greatly assist Gisborne District Council in this.Dana Kirkpatrick: What further work is the Government doing to speed up recovery from severe weather events?Hon TODD McCLAY: Just last week my colleague Minister Mitchell announced an allocation of $16.8 million of Budget 2024 funding to support 12 councils in accelerating recovery efforts following those severe weather events in 2023. Of this funding an additional $5 million has been allocated to the Gisborne District Council for initiatives to accelerate roading network recovery speed up voluntary buyouts and flood risk mitigation projects.Dana Kirkpatrick: And how else does the Government intend to ensure safety in the region and to mitigate future risk?Hon TODD McCLAY: Well yesterday I also announced the Government's intention to review slash rules within the national environmental standards for commercial forestry to improve outcomes without adding unnecessary cost. The Government will help councils and industry better manage high-risk areas while supporting forestry's contribution to jobs and regional economic growth. Forestry is an important part of New Zealand's economy and a big contributor to meeting our climate change obligations. We now need to reduce cost and get the rules right to get Tairāwhiti and other parts of the economy back on track.
11. Question No. 11—RevenueCAMERON BREWER (National—Upper Harbour) to the Minister of RevenueQuestion No. 11—Revenue11. CAMERON BREWER (National—Upper Harbour) to the Minister of Revenue: What announcements has he made on tax?Hon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue): This week the Government tabled the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2024–25 Emergency Response and Remedial Measures) Bill which sets the tax rates for this year and makes changes to the tax system. The Government tables a bill like this every year and this time we're focused on boosting productivity and making the tax system simple and easy to use.Cameron Brewer: How does this bill relate to the Government's announcements on tax relief?Hon SIMON WATTS: Well after 14 long years around 1.9 million households have now received the first of their promised tax relief. This bill will lock in those rates for the next year lowering the tax rates for low and middle income New Zealanders. I hope all parties will support lower taxes for hard-working Kiwis when the bill has its first reading this afternoon.Cameron Brewer: What other changes to the tax system are proposed?Hon SIMON WATTS: Well the bill proposes various changes to the tax system to make it function better. These include simplifying and shortening the process required to deliver tax relief during disasters delivering on our commitments to change the tax treatment of employee stock options and making it easier for young people to enrol in KiwiSaver to get them saving early. All these proposed changes underline the Government's commitment to focus the tax system on simplicity productivity and growth.Cameron Brewer: Does the bill propose any new taxes?Hon SIMON WATTS: Well I am happy to confirm that no such proposals are contained in this bill. This Government is focused on delivering lower taxes for hard-working Kiwis not dreaming up new ways to tax them as some members are keen to do.
6. Question No. 6—PoliceJAMES MEAGER (National—Rangitata) to the Minister of PoliceQuestion No. 6—Police6. JAMES MEAGER (National—Rangitata) to the Minister of Police: By how much have Police foot patrols increased under this Government?Hon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police): Before I answer the member's question I'd like to acknowledge the hard work of our police in Christchurch and Auckland who yesterday terminated Operation Avon an eight-month investigation targeting the Comancheros in Christchurch. As a result of Operation Avon every patched member of the Comancheros gang in Christchurch has been arrested by police. I want to acknowledge and thank those staff for the work they have done to rid Christchurch of the misery and violence that gang peddles. SPEAKER: Good. Now what about linking that to the primary question? It would be helpful.Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well beat constables have got a very important role to play in that too and actually they have prevented $50 million worth of crime harm and sent a clear signal that police are protecting and controlling our streets not the gangs. In answer to the member's question he may not have seen a 1News report last night which identified that foot patrols have increased by 10 percent under this Government's watch compared with the year prior. This is in part due to the community beat teams that police have stood up in Auckland Wellington and Christchurch and an increased focus on visible presence throughout the country. James Meager: Has he been asked about claims of a decrease in foot patrols? Hon MARK MITCHELL: Yesterday I was asked about claims that foot patrols have decreased by 15 percent nationwide despite this Government's investment in 500 more police and the resulting community beat teams from police. Not only was that claim wrong it was also misleading and it undermined front-line staff doing great work getting out on the beat. As I've said police data shows a 10 percent increase under this Government.James Meager: So by how much have foot patrols increased in Upper Hutt? Hon MARK MITCHELL: Alongside the claim of a nationwide decrease there was a claim that foot patrols have dropped by 75 percent in Upper Hutt. The data shows that comparing December 2023 to June 2024 with the year prior there's been a 250 percent more increase of foot patrols in Upper Hutt—250 percent increase. This coincides with an increase of 84 percent in Lower Hutt 128 percent more in Naenae and 450 percent more in Wainuiōmata. James Meager: Has he—SPEAKER: Hang on. We're just going to wait for your question to be heard in silence. Way you go. James Meager: Has he had any feedback on the increased beat presence here in Wellington? Hon MARK MITCHELL: Yes. I've received very positive feedback on the outstanding work that our police beat constables are doing and the sense of safety and security that they're bringing to Wellington's CBD. The reassurance and preventative work that they do with an increased presence is outstanding. The feedback I've had from constables is that they are enjoying engaging with the public and getting to know their patches.
Brownlee GerryPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: A petition has been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.CLERK: Petition of Social Justice Aotearoa requesting that the House amend the End of Life Choice Act by removing the words within 6 months" from section 5 and providing that people are eligible for assisted dying who suffer from a degenerative disease that will ultimately end their life.SPEAKER: That petition stands referred to the Petitions Committee. No papers have been delivered. No select committee reports have been delivered for presentation. no bills have been introduced."
Upston Louise; McAnulty KieranBUSINESS STATEMENTHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector) on behalf of the Leader of the House: Today the House will adjourn until Tuesday 10 September. In that week the House will consider the second readings of the Education and Training Amendment Bill and the Contracts of Insurance Bill. It will also consider the third reading of the Corrections Amendment Bill. On Tuesday there are the Estimates debates for the health Māori development and transport portfolios. Wednesday will be a members' day.Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour): I thank the acting Leader of the House for that. The question that I have is around the extended sittings. If it happens like it did this week that it's not required would the Government consider using that scheduled extended sitting to fill the deficit in the outstanding members' day during that time?Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector): I know the members opposite are excited about the huge amount of work and legislation that the Government is progressing and he'll just have to wait and see.
Tuesday 30 July 2024 - Volume 777
Kuriger BarbaraTHURSDAY 29 AUGUST 2024The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSBARBARA KURIGER (Deputy Speaker): Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom justice mercy and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Points of Order — Speaker's Rulings—Parliamentary Privilege
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That debate on this question now close.Ayes 68New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.Noes 49New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Tana.Motion agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): The question is that the Hon Ginny Andersen's tabled amendment to clause 8 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 49New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Tana.Noes 68New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 1 be agreed to.Ayes 68New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.Noes 49New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Tana.Part 1 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): Members it's time for me to suspend the committee for the dinner break. The committee will resume at 7.30 p.m.Sitting suspended from 5.57 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.