edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionVote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11452. Text is subject to correction.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Clause 1 agreed to.
Vote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionVote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11452. Text is subject to correction.]A party vote was called for on the question That Part 2 be agreed to.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Part 2 agreed to.
Vote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionVote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11452. Text is subject to correction.]A party vote was called for on the question That Part 1 be agreed to.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Part 1 agreed to.
Vote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionVote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11444. Text is subject to correction.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Bill read a second time.
Vote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionVote: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11434. Text is subject to correction.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Bill read a first time.
Seymour David: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionSeymour David: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11457. Text is subject to correction.]DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in favour and support of this bill even though I regard it as a regrettable piece of public policy because—as I have said in earlier stages—of the wider context of a need to support this Budget and to keep these people over here and keep those people over there except for Phil Goff who will soon be joining us in Auckland on a more permanent basis.I just have a question for the Minister and for the proponents of this bill and it is this: what do they say to the 15 percent of New Zealanders and the 35.5 percent of Māori who now pay $2800 in tobacco excise tax every single year and under this bill will soon pay $3800 of excise tax every year because they smoke? I presume what the Minister and his supporters would say is: “Well they should quit.” There is one small problem with that and it is that they have not. The regulatory impact statement for this bill vastly overestimates how many people will quit for the amount of tax taken from the poorest households in this country.I saw one such example of this not so long ago in a Countdown supermarket in Auckland. I saw a mother with a very young girl. The mother was buying a tin of milk and a packet of Winfield 25s—three-quarters of the cost of which was tax. I cannot presume to know all of their circumstances but by the look of it from the way they were dressed and from the expression on their faces the little girl was fixated on those cigarettes as if to say: “That could have been dinner.” A 7-year-old girl could work out what this policy is doing. It is having minimal effect on smoking cessation but it is literally taking food out of the mouths of some the poorest children in this country.I would say to my colleague from the Māori Party that Dame Tariana Turia is a woman deserving of the greatest of respect and the intentions are extremely noble but policies must not be measured by intentions. They must be measured by outcomes. This policy will take the tobacco tax on the average smoker from 2800 bucks per year up to 3800 bucks. That is not an enlightened policy. It is a highly regressive tax and the costs imposed in terms of poverty and deprivation on the people most in need far outweigh any possible benefits that we have been able to observe from the first 5 years of this policy.With that I support this bill because it is part of a broader Budget that I think is good. But make no mistake it is a highly regrettable policy that will do far more harm than it does good. We have to support it in spite of the fact that it is not good policy whatsoever.
Tisch Lindsay: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionTisch Lindsay: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11457. Text is subject to correction.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call David Seymour—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionTisch Lindsay: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11456. Text is subject to correction.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call—Marama Fox 5 minutes.
Hague Kevin: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionHague Kevin: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11455. Text is subject to correction.]KEVIN HAGUE (Green): It was indeed good to hear Minister Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga in his contribution to the Committee stage indicate that the Government was committed to passing the plain packaging legislation in the second half of this year. That will be very welcome because although tax increases on tobacco products are the most effective measure of reducing death and illness from the most preventable cause of death and illness they are not enough alone; they need to be part of a comprehensive suite of measures. One of those is plain packaging and the Green Party certainly wishes that the Government was also open to the issue of smoking in cars and smoking in parks and open to the kinds of restrictions on retail supply such as a register of retailers as has been recommended. We look forward to further discussions with the Government on that.I note that the Government intends to review its progress against the Smokefree Aotearoa goal in 2018. At that point it may well be that New Zealand continues not to be on track for achieving Smokefree Aotearoa by 2025 as we are not now. We are not currently on track. We are for middle-class Pākehā New Zealanders but not for Māori not for Pasifika and not for low-income Pākehā people. If we continue not to be on trackin 2018 then I call on the Government to indicate that it is open to reviewing these taxation measures because at that point we will have demonstrated that they are inadequate. With that I close this contribution and indicate that the Green Party will continue to support this measure.
Nash Stuart: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionNash Stuart: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11451. Text is subject to correction.]STUART NASH (Labour—Napier): It would have been good if Clayton Mitchell had actually come to the Finance and Expenditure Committee when we were debating this then he may have understood that the evidence says that this is actually a good thing in terms of stopping people smoking. In a way we did hear submissions on this in the Budget Policy Statement. We had about 20 submissions submitted. They were of a very high quality and a lot of them were academic submissions so they were very worthwhile.I just have a very quick question for Minister Lotu-Iiga and that is this: if we are taking an evidence-based approach to this did he actually look at any evidence at all that suggested the tax increase should not be 10 percent but should be 20 percent as recommended by a number of the researchers? In fact there are a whole lot of credible national and international studies that said 10 percent is just not enough; it has got to be 20 percent. A number of other studies actually said you should do a one-off hit of about 40 percent. These are not the people who are subjective; this is very objective research. So my question is whether the Minister looked at bringing in an excise duty that was higher than the 10 percent in this bill. Thank you very much.
Borrows Chester: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionBorrows Chester: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11445. Text is subject to correction.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Leave is put for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
Ross Jami-Lee: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionRoss Jami-Lee: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11445. Text is subject to correction.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for all questions in this debate to be taken as one debate and voted on separately.
Brownlee Gerry: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionBrownlee Gerry: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11421. Text is subject to correction.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister supporting Greater Christchurch Regeneration): The previous speaker David Clark has either no capacity himself or no research support with a capacity to read a Budget and understand what is in it. Those claims about health cuts are utter rubbish and completely wrong. This year the Budget provided an extra $1.6 billion—$1600 million extra—for district health boards.To suggest that this proposal is all about taking extra tax for all the things that the Labour Party does not like is completely disingenuous. The reality is that the member himself agreed that price is one of the best ways to deter people from smoking cigarettes. That is why this Government unlike any other before has been prepared to go out and put up the price of tobacco repeatedly year after year after year. The Māori Party is to be commended for the way in which it has held the Government to that over that period of time. It gets our full support in doing that.This proposal will see the price of cigarettes rise not to $30 as TV ONE reported last night but to almost $37 over the next couple of years. That will be a serious serious deterrent. To suggest that somehow the Labour Party is going to vote for this bill only if it gets an iron-clad guarantee that all the tax that comes off that will be used on these various programmes put together by their friends the lefty experts who think they are so important in all this stuff is utter rubbish. This Budget has over 4 years more than $2 billion additional funding going to health. Public health is a big winner in that. I would also point out that those experts will have no job when we reach the target of total cessation or near enough by 2025. So one thing I would say to the Labour Party is: be very careful about the vested interests you listen to.My final comment is that that particular group of people has one lobby group Action on Smoking and Health whose staff I have found in my time in Parliament to be the most rude people who have ever come into my office—and they never will again. But it has not changed my view that we should end smoking as a habit in this country. I support this bill.
Doocey Matt: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is subject to correctionDoocey Matt: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11417. Text is subject to correction.]MATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): Wow! How do I follow that? What absolute negativity. What absolute pessimism. It is very clear why that party now has fewer members than the Green Party. What negativity.On this side of the House we are a lot more positive. This country has done a lot of great work around the emissions trading scheme. Since 1990 we have decoupled emissions from economic growth by 34 percent. We are phasing back now over the next 3 years. I commend this bill to the House.Bill read a third time.
Vote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2339. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a third time.
Vote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2332. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 59 in the name of Metiria Turei to clause 7 be agreed to.Ayes 14Green Party 14.Noes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.Parts 1 and 2 schedule and clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.Bill reported without amendment.Report adopted.
Vote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2332. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the question That the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 58 in the name of Metiria Turei to clauses 5 6 7 8 11 and the schedule be agreed to.Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.
Vote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2332. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 57 in the name of Metiria Turei to clause 7 be agreed to.Ayes 14Green Party 14.Noes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2310. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a second time.
Vote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2292. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a first time.
Vote: UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Urgency[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2274. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That urgency be accorded.Ayes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Motion agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2339. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Is there any objection to that process? There appears to be no objection.
Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSittings of the House[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2339. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Sittings of the HouseJOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National): Members have made excellent progress with our business this evening and there are only a few minutes to go. I seek leave for the House to rise early.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Is there any objection to that process? There appears to be no objection.
Hayes Joanne: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2339. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National): Members have made excellent progress with our business this evening and there are only a few minutes to go. I seek leave for the House to rise early.
Parmar Parmjeet: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParmar Parmjeet: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2339. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): I support the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill and commend the bill to the House. Thank you.
Dowie Sarah: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2337. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): I commend this bill to the House.
Bayly Andrew: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBayly Andrew: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2335. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): It is a pleasure to rise to lend my support to this Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill of 2015. This bill is all about MPs showing leadership. We as MPs need to demonstrate restraint. It is only appropriate that this bill makes these changes. The Prime Minister foreshadowed some of his concern and the outcomes are just. Aligning our pay to the public sector is a good way to go. It is fair it is equitable and it is reasonable. I commend the bill to the House. Thank you very much.
Lees-Galloway Iain: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2335. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): I support this bill and commend it to the House.
Young Jonathan: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2335. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the third reading of this bill. Can I just say there were some pertinent points that Chris Hipkins the previous speaker made and thank you for the support that he and his colleagues have given to this bill. I think when we look at how the Remuneration Authority determines its salary bands and settings one of the things that it does do is look at fair relativity with comparable positions the need to be fair to both individuals whose pay is being set and to taxpayers the requirements of the job the need to recruit and retain competent individuals and any prevailing adverse economic conditions.I guess in many regards the mystery of the magic of how all of this comes together is now being faced with a different process which I believe brings transparency.Every year the salaries are set in accordance with this formula so that we are not going to get any big surprises and huge headlines. It is going to be predictable. It is going to be something that the public sector across the board has already received the previous year. I think in many regards people in our country will say this is a process that is going to work and brings that degree of transparency certainty and I would say even equivalency through this process. I am very happy in the final reading of this bill to commend it to the House. Thank you.
Woodhouse Michael: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWoodhouse Michael: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2332. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): I move That the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. The bill is the Government’s response to the most recent determination of the Remuneration Authority which provides for an increase in the remuneration received by MPs of 3.56 percent effective from 1 July 2014. The Government considers this increase to be disproportionate to the salary movements in the wider public sector and unfair to taxpayers. The bill limits the Remuneration Authority consideration to applying the wage growth in the public sector as measured by the quarterly employment survey to MPs’ remuneration. The bill provides a fair response to the disproportionate increase in MPs’ remuneration by providing a measure that reflects the average growth in public sector wages. This ensures that the taxpayer is not unfairly burdened by any unwarranted increases in remuneration. In summation the Government believes that these alignments will align MPs’ remuneration with that of the wider public sector and will strike the right balance between the interests of taxpayers and those whose remuneration is being assessed. I commend the bill to the House.
Lee Melissa: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLee Melissa: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2332. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MELISSA LEE (National): I move That the question be now put.Motion agreed to.
Woodhouse Michael: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWoodhouse Michael: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2310. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): I seek leave for all parts of the bill to be taken as one question.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.
Parmar Parmjeet: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParmar Parmjeet: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2307. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the second reading of the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill. As we have heard the Minister has addressed various issues raised by the Opposition. The main issue is that this issue cannot be addressed without changing the legislation. The sole criterion that will determine a member of Parliament’s pay increase has been debated and the sole criterion in the bill is the right one which I will address later on.The Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill is to amend the Remuneration Authority Act 1977 to require the Remuneration Authority to solely consider public sector wage movements when determining salary increases for members of Parliament.I am taking a short call to say that I am fully supportive of this bill. This bill is about fairness. This bill actually helps the Remuneration Authority so that the salaries of members of Parliament assessed under section 16(2) of the Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Act 2013 can move up in line with those in the public sector. This bill sets the frequency of these adjustments. It also clarifies for the Remuneration Authority if there is no movement in the average earnings in the public sector.There has been criticism from other parties of rushing this through. This bill has been thoroughly thought through. It is time we address this issue and not just talk about it. The criticism from members of the public normally is that the pay increases of members of Parliament are higher than those in the public sector. This bill is to address that issue. As we know this bill is going through all stages today under urgency. This is because there is no justification seen in the Remuneration Authority’s determination of an approximately 3.5 percent increase in the salaries of members of Parliament.There were some comments from the Opposition about some positions in the public sector and even the private sector being very highly paid. Those salaries are decided by the market. Why would people work in a country if they are not rewarded for the value they add to the organisation? We need to be able to recruit and retain good people but this bill is not about their salary; this bill is about addressing the salary increases of members of Parliament only.The Government must ensure that people are listened to and are treated fairly and that is what this bill is about. We must lead by example and that is why I support this bill. I look forward to contributing more on later stages. Thank you.
Tisch Lindsay: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2307. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): You will take your seat yes.
Tisch Lindsay: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Iain Lees-Galloway—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2304. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Metiria Turei—5 minutes.
Bridges Simon: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question Nos 7 and 9 to MinisterText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBridges Simon: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question Nos 7 and 9 to Minister[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2304. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): I seek leave to make corrections to answers I gave to question Nos 7 and 9 earlier today.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: During an answer provided to the House today in response to a supplementary question on question No. 7 I referred to decisions on the 10 bridges programme being made “late last week” when in fact I meant late in the week starting Monday 2 March. During an answer provided to the House today in response to a supplementary question on question No. 9 I referred to the board of inquiry process having been completed for the Pūhoi to Wellsford road of national significance. I have since been advised that the board of inquiry has consented only the Pūhoi to Warkworth section of the road.
Dowie Sarah: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2304. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): In this second reading of the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill I just want to clarify a couple of points raised by me in the first reading. In doing so I agree with the member opposite the Hon Annette King that there is certainly no point in jawboning the authority. There certainly is not. But as part of this amendment I believe that the criteria not only needs to be clear but needs to be fair in the grand scheme of things when we look at the economy in New Zealand and obviously globally. As part of that I agree with what the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety said. It is incredibly difficult to make comparisons between an MP’s role and other comparable roles. What is comparable when you take into account staffing levels accountability skills and results? That is not necessarily underselling us either but it is just incredibly hard to do when you look at the differences in the roles.I do believe that aligning us with the public sector the quarterly employment survey and the average salary movements and bracketing us with those hard-working individuals and officials who work for the Public Service is fair. We are experiencing 0.8 percent inflation. As has been mentioned by the Prime Minister if any increase is appropriate a 1 to 2 percent increase is appropriate in these times as we are asking our officials to live within their means and do more on less. With that I commend this bill to the House.Debate interrupted.
Hayes Joanne: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2292. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): I am pleased to stand to take a short call on the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill. I am pleased to see that our members across the way over there are supporting this bill because I can tell you that when I hear the member Robertson talk about executive salaries rising I worked in an industry—in the health sector actually—many moons ago and I saw that. We struggled away with the paltry sums that we got to pay our people. To be honest when I came here I did not expect any pay rise because that is not what I am here for. I am here to work for the people. I am here to represent the people. So when the Prime Minister made the statement that he made about stopping the pay rise of 3.56 percent for our MP salaries I was absolutely delighted.I want to thank Mr Woodhouse for leading this bill and for taking it through to its completion. I also want to commend my fellow speakers behind me who have articulated the appraisal of this particular bill and the work albeit fast that has gone into it to date. I can tell you that the results that we have had out there and the kōrero that is happening out there with the public—they are very pleased to see that this Government is actually listening to them and that we are a responsible Government and are managing the finances of this country with great vigour and responsibility which all people of this country would be looking forward to seeing. So without any further ado—there are a couple more stages to go on this—I commend the bill to the House.
Mallard Trevor: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2288. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Marama Fox—5 minutes.
Brownlee Gerry: UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Urgency[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2273. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I move That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing through all stages of the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill and any bills into which it may be divided. The issues that surround the need for this bill to make progress today have been well canvassed by politicians in the media and by many commentators from outside as well. It comes from the decision by the Remuneration Authority to accord to members of Parliament pay increases that are well outside nor in line with public expectations. This bill is proposing to set down a formula that will link the Remuneration Authority’s consideration to the quarterly employment survey for the Public Service. It does need to go through all stages in one hit in order that there is no delay in some of the process issues that will now go with the suspension of the Remuneration Authority’s current order and the return to the 2013 order and therefore in proper instruction being given to those who are responsible for actually providing that remuneration to members of Parliament.
O'Connor Simon: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2272. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What recent announcements has the Government made regarding responsible lending?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): The National Government wants to help Kiwi families who need to borrow money get better access to information upfront and give them robust protection from the predatory practices of loan sharks and unscrupulous payday lenders. Today the Government has released the Responsible Lending Code. The code will give lenders principles-based guidance on how to implement the new lender responsibility principles set out in the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Amendment Act and comes into force on 6 June this year.Simon O’Connor: How will the code help borrowers?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Under the code and the legislation lenders must consider whether borrowers are able to repay their debt without suffering undue hardship and help them make informed decisions. The code also includes more targeted advice for high-cost credit agreements or where the borrower may be a vulnerable borrower. We know that most lenders already follow responsible lending practices with their customers and we do not want to get in the way of that. However we know that a percentage of lenders loan sharks and unscrupulous payday lenders are not. This code is about providing good principles-based guidance for lenders while maintaining robust protections for consumers. It is just another example of the Government’s ambitious Business Growth Agenda which is working for New Zealand.
O'Rourke Denis: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2268. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First) to the Minister of Transport: When will the detailed plans designations and construction schedule be available for the full Pūhoi to Wellsford motorway?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): I appreciate the member’s eagerness but good things take time. I can assure the member though that I am working really hard on bringing forward this road of national significance. One reason for that is the great National Party candidate we have in Northland Mark Osborne who is pestering me in relation to this road of national significance. Unlike other candidates he actually wants this road of national significance. He does not call it a “Holiday Highway” and unlike Winston—Mr SPEAKER: Order!Denis O’Rourke: When will action be taken to appoint a board of inquiry to consider and finalise designs for the Warkworth to Wellsford leg of the Pūhoi to Wellsford motorway?Hon Simon Bridges: It is good to see that New Zealand First takes a keen interest in these sorts of projects. I think you will find we already have had a board of inquiry.Denis O’Rourke: Why has he been making pronouncements about a motorway for Northland as far as Wellsford when the only substantive actions taken so far relate to the route from Pūhoi to Warkworth?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Because I really like motorways and I back the people of the north.Denis O’Rourke: How can Northlanders trust the Minister and his Government on getting a better State highway for them when the Government’s real interest in Northland has been limited to making belated election promises rather than real preparations for a complete route from Pūhoi to Wellsford?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Seven hundred and fifty million dollars is not belated. I would call “belated” not even standing a candidate in the last three elections. We have backed the north previously we continue to do so and with a $1.75 billion highway on its way we are doing a great job in Northland.
Stewart Barbara: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStewart Barbara: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2265. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement regarding the closing down of a health centre published on Newstalk ZBthis morning “there’s no facility in Wellsford that is closing and that is what my officials have told me”?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Yes.Barbara Stewart: Does the Minister believe that moving the community nurse from the Coast to Coast health care medical centre at 220 Rodney Street in Wellsford to Wellsford School is not a cost-cutting exercise?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: What I can tell the member is that no health centre is closing no service is ceasing and no staff are leaving. All we can find is that one nurse who did admin in her old office is moving to a new office in Wellsford where she will still do admin. Services in Wellsford are expanding not reducing.Barbara Stewart: Is this a dedicated nurse for Wellsford School; if so how will the adult needs of the Wellsford community be met?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: They will be just fine.Barbara Stewart: Does the Minister believe that Wellsford School is a suitable venue for a community nurse when any member of the community with physical or mental health needs may enter that school in search of health care from the community nurse?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: She is not providing health care services there. She is just doing admin and I would have thought that is a great place to do it.
Dunne Peter: Motions — Cyclone Pam—Expression of Support for Vanuatu and Other Pacific CountriesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDunne Peter: Motions — Cyclone Pam—Expression of Support for Vanuatu and Other Pacific Countries[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2259. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future): I want to join with others who have expressed support and sympathy for the people of Vanuatu in their horrific travails in the wake of Cyclone Pam. This storm the greatest of recent years has wreaked devastation at a level unparalleled in the history of the island. It is one that will take many years to recover from and will leave not just a physical scar but also an emotional scar on the people of Vanuatu.In a country like New Zealand we have two responses in situations like this. It is appropriate that we provide what humanitarian and other assistance that we can to help people recover and restore the basic functions of life so that they can get on but it is also something we need to reflect upon—our wider responsibility to all of the countries in the Pacific and those that we have a particular relationship with. We are privileged in this country by our comparative prosperity and wealth and we do not face necessarily the same devastating extremes of weather that they do in parts of the Pacific. Having said that I want to pay tribute to those people in the far north and on the east coast of New Zealand who have been affected by this storm. There has been significant damage but I think the distinction is that it is not of a magnitude that imperils the function of the whole country the way the damage that has struck Vanuatu does. I also want to take the opportunity to acknowledge the people of the Chatham Islands. They have faced in the last 24 hours the brunt of this storm. They are part of the people of New Zealand and we have a responsibility to them as well to make sure that they can recover effectively.We live in a very vulnerable part of the world climatically. One of the other speakers has already made reference to that. Although I do not want to indulge in the politics of the matter in an occasion like this I think it is fair to observe that these circumstances do drive us to reflect upon causes and do drive us to reflect upon what we can do to help island States in such situations and to help our fellow Pacific neighbours get through these terrible tragedies. I support the efforts the Government has made to date. I know that the people of New Zealand will similarly support strong humanitarian efforts to help Vanuatu reconstruct and to help the people of Vanuatu get on with these lives. I hope that that gap cannot be too long because life must continue and they must have the opportunity to put themselves back together and to get their jobs their families and their communities back functioning again. We have the responsibility to do what we can to help them do that.Motion agreed to.