edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Mallard Trevor: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Extended licensing hours during Rugby World Cup) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Extended licensing hours during Rugby World Cup) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5732. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The presiding officers have had some inquiries as to whether the vote on this bill will be a conscience issue determined by a personal vote. Normally the sale of alcohol is treated as a conscience issue by parties and that fact is known generally well in advance of the first reading of a bill. In the case of this bill which was introduced by leave today there has not been the opportunity to gauge whether in fact parties have positions on it. Therefore people in the Chair will determine during the course of the debate whether parties have positions on the bill or whether they are treating it as a conscience issue and the obvious things will flow from that.
Mallard Trevor: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Referral of Bill to Government Administration CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Referral of Bill to Government Administration Committee[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5732. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): In the excitement of the moment I forgot to invite Nick Smith to refer his bill to the select committee. So to correct my error I seek the leave of the House for the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill to be referred to the Government Administration Committee. There being no objection to that we have handled that one.Bill referred to the Government Administration Committee.
Smith Nick: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Nick: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5730. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): Just to exercise my right of reply I thank members from each of the parties for their contributions. I acknowledge the broad support in the House for this bill. I particularly welcome the reflection of the rich history of the Christian churches from my colleague Shane Reti which I think reminds us of some of the struggles of the early people who founded our nation and their work as missionaries both in New Zealand and overseas. As members of this House have noted this bill is simply about allowing Christian Churches New Zealand to be able to modernise the governance of their properties. I welcome the ongoing work of the House through the Government Administration Committee to be able to progress this bill and enable Christian Churches New Zealand to have a more governance structure of their church properties across our country.Bill read a first time.
Sio William: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSio William: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5728. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Su’a WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Māngere): I am happy to make a short contribution on this particular bill. As my colleague Stuart Nash said earlier there does not appear to be any controversy with the bill and the information therein. It is basically straightforward. It is a transfer of all rights obligations and contractual arrangements from the old board to the new board. It is dissolving the old board under the legislation and removing it from the register of charitable trusts. The third point is that it is repealing the legislation that was the basis for the old board.The only thing that I would raise at this early stage and suggest that the select committee could I believe look at is that the bill does not make any reference to the trust deed. It does not make any reference to how the members of that trust will be elected. It does not make any reference to whether the trust deed will be changed; yet in the explanatory note it makes reference to the fact that the old board was set up essentially for property purposes—for real estate. The new board wants now to expand its obligations and so I think—particularly with the chair of the Government Administration Committee here—that that is an area that I hope that members of the association may want to enlighten the committee on.I want to acknowledge the fact that the churches or whoever drafted the legislation have provided a fairly comprehensive history of the organisation. It is wonderful to note the wonderful work that they have done not only in New Zealand but also on an international level. But I think we owe it to the wider membership to have a little bit of a better look at those things and I am hopeful that the people who make submissions to the select committee process will raise that.The final point that I would make is that I find it really interesting that on occasions such as this we have members on the Government benches revealing their Christian backgrounds. I am hopeful that by their revealing those they acknowledge the work that church organisations are doing right at this very moment. They are dealing with the very difficult issues that people are facing the length and breadth of New Zealand. When members reveal their Christian backgrounds or their affiliation I hope that they take note of the struggles that the church organisations are having to deal with in particular the housing crisis and a range of other difficult tasks that people are dealing with. When members raise these issues I want to remind them that they have an obligation to minimise the inequality that their policies have caused. Thank you.
Mitchell Mark: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5726. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): I am happy to take a call. I have to say that I did get some very good-natured ribbing from my colleagues when I was picked to speak on this bill as I am a Catholic boy who was born and raised on the North Shore and schooled at Rosmini College. I grew up in the parish of St John’s in Mairangi Bay. But I am very happy to speak to this bill.I want to acknowledge the Minister Nick Smith because if there was any Minister who was going to sponsor a bill be passionate about it and make sure that it travelled safely through its passage in this House it would be the Hon Dr Nick Smith. I was very pleased to see that one of the churches—[Interruption] Sorry what was that Ruth?Hon Ruth Dyson: You need to repeat them. He’s not listening.MARK MITCHELL: No he got it—do not worry. He knows. I am very pleased to point out and acknowledge one of the churches—and it is really pleasing to see that the churches are spread right throughout the country. So although the bill has been sponsored by the Hon Dr Nick Smith it is actually relevant for a good part of New Zealand. One of the churches is the Mairangi Bay Community Church which I know very well. It does terrific work in our communities. It is really pleasing to see that what this bill is going to do is allow it to use its assets for a much wider outreach in terms of the work the services and the care that it is going to be able to deliver into the communities that it serves. Of course this relates to all the churches and the Christian centres that are going to be affected by the bill. So I am very very happy to recommend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Clendon David: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClendon David: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5726. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID CLENDON (Green): I am pleased to take a very brief call on this bill. I suspect I am one of the many people in the House who perhaps were not aware of the existence of this organisation. It is perhaps one of those interesting little statutory anomalies that pop up from time to time. Clearly it now appears to be necessary for a legislative instrument to rename I guess to remake a trust board that has existed since about 1929.It was interesting reading the history behind this bill. Genuinely I have recently been reading a book called Bible & Treaty: Missionaries Among the Māori—A New Perspective which talks about the influence of the early missionaries in Northland especially around Pēwhairangi. It is a good reminder in fact that the churches were part of the fabric of our culture—our shared culture—over many years and indeed still are albeit perhaps in a different and arguably somewhat less persuasive form.We have read the bill obviously; we have had a look through it. We are persuaded that it is a well-drafted piece of legislation. The responsibilities rights obligations contractual arrangements and so on of the existing board carry forward to the new arrangement and that is as it should be. We see nothing in the bill to suggest any malice or anything other than a pragmatic response to a situation that has emerged over nearly 100 years so we are very happy to support this bill.
Nash Stuart: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNash Stuart: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5724. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STUART NASH (Labour—Napier): A wise—actually not—choice. Look we support this bill. It seems like it is a very non-contentious bill. I note as the previous speaker the Minister Nick Smith stated that the bill replaces the Associated Churches of Christ Church Property Act 1929. Whenever I see this sort of bill which really is non-contentious and basically just changes the legal structure under which assets are held I always have just one question—and I think the Minister answered this but it is one that has to be asked—and that is whether all the members of all the parishes actually agreed to the change of structure. Obviously there are legal implications from changing the structure even though I note that the new trust under the bill we are talking about now will still be bound by all of the deals contracts and obligations of the old trust. In fact it appears reading through the bill that very little will change except the actual name. Again we just need to know that every parish member or every parish that is part of this actually agreed to this. I think the Minister alluded to that.I also note that things change over 85 years. Back in 1929 who knew what was going to be happening in 2015? They set up a structure 85 years ago to meet the times and times have changed. It is quite interesting and I have reflected on that. Obviously the country was in the grip of a recessionin 1929; there was record unemployment and people were worried about their jobs their future their children and their families. Although some things change a lot in 85 years some things do not change either. We are still in a period 85 years later where we have record unemployment where we have a global financial crisis where people are still worried about their future where we have a commission for work because we do not know what work is going to look like. So although much changes a lot does not change.We are supporting this bill. It is a non-contentious bill. It is sensible. I doubt that all the property is going to be returned to Rome. Is there such a thing as a true church?Tim Macindoe: Your great-grandfather would have liked it.STUART NASH: Yes Walter was a lay preacheractually. He believed in this. In fact he was what you would call a Christian democrat as opposed to a social democrat.Tim Macindoe: He’d be proud of you.STUART NASH: He would be very proud—a lay preacher; there is no doubt about that. He was in Parliament in 1929 so he probably spoke on this very legislation all those years ago. Minister Smith you can nod if you like—you are not concentrating. I sort of expect that from Nick Smith. We support this bill and I commend it to the House.
Mallard Trevor: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5724. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I call Stuart Nash.Hon Ruth Dyson: Oh excellent choice.
Mallard Trevor: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: General Debate[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5723. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! The time for this debate has expired.The debate having concluded the motion lapsed.
Carter David: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: General Debate[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5716. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member’s time has expired.
Twyford Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTwyford Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5704. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū) to the Minister for Building and Housing: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that Aucklanders are getting wealthier because their house prices are going up?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Building and Housing): I agree with the full statement of the Prime Minister where he also stated that the rate of increase is not sustainable that growing supply is critical to containing ongoing increases and that new measures like the Government’s tax changes would ensure that people buying in property for profit would pay their fair share. The PM’s statements are much more accurate than the shonky figures from the members—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That will not help the order of the House.Phil Twyford: Why does he believe that Aucklanders would prefer to see the paper value of their houses increase rather than their children and grandchildren being able to achieve the dream of owning their own homes?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: This Government is absolutely committed to people owning their own home and that is why on 1 April we launched the HomeStart scheme which is going great guns in helping thousands of New Zealanders get into their own home. I remind the member that the biggest increase in house prices where houses were significantly less affordable than they are today actually occurred during the 9 years of the previous administration.Phil Twyford: Given the Prime Minister’s statements what does he say to the half of the population who are locked out of the housing market under his policies and who are not generating paper wealth from skyrocketing house prices?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I would say to those people that this Government has the most comprehensive programme of housing reforms that has been seen by any Government in more than a generation: the support from HomeStart the Auckland Housing Accord and special housing areas and the social housing reforms. And I would draw attention to the fact that over the last 3 years the rate of housebuilding in Auckland has increased from 4000 per year to over 8000 per year showing that we are getting the new houses that New Zealand needs.Phil Twyford: Is this political calculation—that enough voters are happy with skyrocketing house prices—why his Government has done nothing meaningful to tackle the causes of the housing crisis and why it prefers to roll out an endless procession of grudging half measures and tinkering and dabbling that makes no difference?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: It is rich for the member to describe them as half measures because when we passed the special housing areas legislation to open up new areas in housing that member put my face on a billboard all over Auckland saying that I was going too far. He cannot have it both ways. Equally this is the member who complains when interest rates go up and complains when interest rates go down. The truth is that the member is the member for moaning not solutions.
Ngaro Alfred: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNgaro Alfred: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5704. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.ALFRED NGARO (National) to the Minister of Justice: What recent announcements has she made regarding New Zealand’s domestic violence laws?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister of Justice): Last week I launched the discussion paper Strengthening New Zealand’s legislative response to family violence to take a comprehensive look at the Domestic Violence Act and the intersection between domestic violence the Care of Children Act the Crimes Act the Bail Act and the Sentencing Act with a view to starting a comprehensive rethink of how our system of laws deals with the scourge of family violence. As justice Minister reducing family violence is my top priority.Alfred Ngaro: How significant an issue is family violence in New Zealand?Hon AMY ADAMS: The rate of family violence in New Zealand is horrific. Despite crime rates in New Zealand falling to a 30-year low family violence statistics are stubbornly high. In 2014 police responded to more than 100000 incidents and on average every year 14 women seven men and eight children are killed as a result of family violence. Nearly half of all New Zealand’s homicides and reported violent crimes are related to family violence and on average 41 percent of police response time is spent on family violence. These are staggering statistics and they are only the ones we know about. We know that as much as 80 percent of family violence may go unreported. Although the Government cannot solve the whole problem we are committed to finding better ways to address it.Alfred Ngaro: What else is the Government doing to address family violence?Hon AMY ADAMS: The review is just one part of the work under way. Other initiatives include establishing a Chief Victims Advisor to the Government whom I expect to be appointed later this year. There are also projects under way to speed up court cases to improve judges’ access to information for intensive case management practices and for portable safety alarms for high-risk victims. The social development Minister and I have also launched a new work programme to ensure that Government agencies work in an integrated way to address family and sexual violence identifying gaps and duplications in services and making improvements to help break the cycle of family violence.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5703. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: No we are not even putting that leave. It has been discussed on many occasions—the Government has the right to determine where the question goes. If the member wants an answer she should proceed to ask it. [Interruption] Order! A little less noise would be helpful.
Turei Metiria: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5703. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. I seek leave to have this question transferred back to the Prime Minister to whom it was originally directed.
Smith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5700. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister for Economic Development: What reports has he received on how New Zealand’s industries have diversified since 2008?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development): I have received a number of reports showing that New Zealand’s industries have diversified significantly since 2008—for example the wine industry where wine exports have nearly doubled from just under $800 million in 2008 to $1.4 billion this year. Beef export revenues have grown from $1.8 billion in 2008 to $3.1 billion in the year to March 2015. Information and communications technology sector exports have more than doubled to $930 million in 2014. Despite the cut-and-paste negative rhetoric of some commentators in this House it is examples like these that show that this Government is getting the settings right in order to encourage growth in diversification of the New Zealand economy.Stuart Smith: How are Government programmes and policies contributing to this diversification and growth?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: They are achieving a huge amount. One of the key initiatives to further diversify the economy is to boost research and development investment in different sectors. The Callaghan Innovation centre that we have set up is investing a substantial amount of new spending in research and development grants and just today I announced the availability of another 233 positions for research and development student grants this summer. The interesting thing is that when you compare business spending in research and development in New Zealand with perhaps Australia—we have a grant scheme and Australia has a tax credit scheme—the research and development here is skewed far more heavily towards high-tech sectors such as information and communications technology and high-tech manufacturing. Nearly 42 percent of business research and development investment in New Zealand is now in the manufacturing sector and computer services make up another 25 percent of business research and development investment. That suggests that we are going to see further diversification and growth in these sectors in the years ahead.Stuart Smith: What has been the impact of this diversification on the economy?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: We have seen quite dramatic employment growth in these industries. For example the information and communications technology industry has grown by around 6200 jobs in the past year. Far from being in crisis the manufacturing industry is employing 24500 more people today than it was a year ago and it is the largest it has been in 7 years. We are also seeing growth in other industries with 50000 more people employed in construction in the past 2 years. That is the highest level it has ever been. There are 20000 more jobs in retail in the past 12 months and in fact over 4½ years we have seen 199000 more people in work.
Seymour David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSeymour David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5698. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Is he happy with the financial returns the taxpayer is achieving from State-owned enterprises; if so why?Hon TODD McCLAY (Minister for State Owned Enterprises): Can I congratulate the member on his member’s bill which will bring enjoyment to even the Green Party. The performance of State-owned enterprises is a mixed picture. Although a number of them are performing well and returning reasonable dividends to the Crown others are not. It is the Government’s expectation that State-owned enterprises are well managed are low risk that they focus on their core business and that they generate a return for the taxpayer.David Seymour: In light of the $500 million collapse in equity value in Solid Energy since 2011 does he acknowledge that not selling the company was a terrible mistake?Hon TODD McCLAY: Solid Energy is a company that is in a very difficult position. It has around half a billion dollars’ worth of debt and about $320 million of that debt is interest bearing and owed to banks some of which matures next year. Equally the coal price was around $370 a tonne a few years ago; this week it hit $85 a tonne. The company and the banks are working constructively towards a solution.David Seymour: Why have the dividends from New Zealand Post fallen from a yield of 5 percent through 2005-08 to only 1.5 percent since and how is this acceptable for what is clearly not an investment in a growth company?Hon TODD McCLAY: There are a number of State-owned enterprises that face changing and challenging circumstances. If we look at the example the member has given which is New Zealand Post there are now 265 million fewer items posted than 10 years ago. In fact there were 80 million fewer letters posted last year than the year before. New Zealand Post is working through these issues. The Government is supportive of the work that the board is doing but it is our expectation that it works constructively so that it provides a very good service to the public and equally gets to a stage where it returns a better dividend to the Crown.
Carter David: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Extended licensing hours during Rugby World Cup) Bill — IntroductionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Extended licensing hours during Rugby World Cup) Bill — Introduction[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5695. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Seymour David: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Extended licensing hours during Rugby World Cup) Bill — IntroductionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSeymour David: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Extended licensing hours during Rugby World Cup) Bill — Introduction[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5695. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I seek leave to introduce a member’s bill in my name on extending the licensing hours for the sale and supply of alcohol for the duration of Rugby World Cup 2015 to be set down for first reading today ahead of members’ order of the day No. 1. To allow for the legislation to commence prior to the start of the Rugby World Cup I also seek leave for the bill following its first reading to be referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee and to be reported back by 26 August 2015 and once reported back for the bill to be given its second and third readings forthwith on the following members’ day 26 August 2015.
Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Referral of Bill to Government Administration CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeChristian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Referral of Bill to Government Administration Committee[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5732. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering BillReferral of Bill to Government Administration CommitteeThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): In the excitement of the moment I forgot to invite Nick Smith to refer his bill to the select committee. So to correct my error I seek the leave of the House for the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill to be referred to the Government Administration Committee. There being no objection to that we have handled that one.Bill referred to the Government Administration Committee.
Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Extended licensing hours during Rugby World Cup) Bill — IntroductionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSale and Supply of Alcohol (Extended licensing hours during Rugby World Cup) Bill — Introduction[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5695. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Wednesday 12 August 2015Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Extended licensing hours during Rugby World Cup) BillIntroductionDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I seek leave to introduce a member’s bill in my name on extending the licensing hours for the sale and supply of alcohol for the duration of Rugby World Cup 2015 to be set down for first reading today ahead of members’ order of the day No. 1. To allow for the legislation to commence prior to the start of the Rugby World Cup I also seek leave for the bill following its first reading to be referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee and to be reported back by 26 August 2015 and once reported back for the bill to be given its second and third readings forthwith on the following members’ day 26 August 2015.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Vote: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5542. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Health and Safety Reform Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 56New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 12; New Zealand First 12.Bill read a second time.
Vote: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5542. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments recommended by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee by majority be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 56New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 12; New Zealand First 12.Amendments agreed to.
Clendon David: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClendon David: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5555. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID CLENDON (Green): Could I just begin my comments by acknowledging that the Minister of Justice has just said a great deal that I can agree with. I do not agree with all of National’s programme clearly but I say that in a context of believing that if we are to reduce crime and to make some real inroads into offending and our management of offenders we need to endeavour to depoliticise some of the issues—to perhaps tone down some of the aggression shall we say between the various sides in this debate about how to deal with issues around justice.So with that point I would say that if one looks at the estimates for the whole suite of justice portfolios—corrections police courts and so on—it is very difficult to make an argument that we are underspending on justice. That collective I have mentioned—the spend would be something well north of $5 billion I think. It is a significant amount of money and it has increased over recent years. Corrections for example—in the early 2000s the spend on corrections I think was about $460 million. This year it is around $1.5 billion. That sort of increase is unsustainable. I think that the issue is not that we are spending too little but that we are not spending it as well as we might do and therefore we are not getting the outcomes that we might seek to achieve. “Justice reinvestment” is the phrase that is commonly used by advocates of taking some political risk—and there is political risk in it—but it is being willing to rethink and to reconsider where we focus the spend on justice where we put the majority of that money and what outcomes we will expect from that.Offending is trending down. The crime rate as the Minister noted is at a historic low. The peculiar anomaly with that of course is that imprisonment is at an all-time high. We need to investigate and analyse that peculiar disconnect. I think that in terms of the popular perception that crime is actually on the increase I think our friends in the fourth estate need to consider their dramatic over-reporting of crime which we see constantly across all of our media. I will not dwell on that but I do believe that is another matter that we need to pay some attention to.To state the obvious the best investment is that which prevents crime and that which reduces the numbers of victims. We will never eliminate crime and offending—that would be some sort of happy nirvana some utopia we are unlikely to ever achieve—but certainly we can reduce it. To give credit where it is due we have seen some very positive moves in terms of resourcing and practice. I think of the police particularly with the Prevention First strategy they have adopted and neighbourhood policing teams. These are all very positive moves that will help reduce crime.Progress reported.Report adopted.
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5550. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): We now come to the justice sector—volume B.5 volume 7. The question is that Vote Attorney-General Vote Corrections Vote Courts Vote Justice Vote Parliamentary Counsel Vote Police and Vote Serious Fraud stand part of the schedules.
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5542. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): When we were last progressing the estimates debate we were debating the vote in the health sector—volume B.5 volume 6—Vote Health.
Dowie Sarah: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5541. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): I have the opportunity to take only a short call in support of this bill but before I do I acknowledge the family members of the victims of Pike River and other workplace tragedies in other sectors across New Zealand especially in agriculture which plays a big part in my electorate of Invercargill.I support this bill for a couple of reasons. I believe that it will create a step change in health and safety in New Zealand. The first which has been covered is in respect of worker engagement and participation. This reformed bill will make that mandatory. We have already heard speakers from this side of the House talk about a vertical integration of health and safety from management down to the worker. It also means that a worker will be able to stop work if they see something that could create harm. I think that that step change will create a culture in which health and safety is brought to the forefront of employees’ and employers’ minds.The other change is this new concept of a person conducting a business or undertaking—a PCBU. It is an acknowledgment that in some workplaces there are overlapping duties. It will force operators or people conducting businesses to talk and to cooperate and insofar as they have the ability to control or influence that matter they will need to take account of that and put in place practical measures to protect their employees.I want to pick up on a point that the Hon Maurice Williamson made in respect of balance. We do need to maintain balance in this legislation. This is especially the case in respect of agriculture. We all realise that the agricultural sector has a high number of deathstoo and that is unacceptable but farming is the backbone of New Zealand especially in the Invercargill electorate. We need to preserve a family’s right to raise their children on the farm and what has been seen in respect of that is a change in the definition of workplace in that work must be being carried out. So the children can still go out on the farm and run and play and enjoy a rural lifestyle but when they are in the milking shed they will need to be taken into the care of and basically held responsible to the health and safety plans that that farmer should have. I believe that that is a good balance. It preserves rural life and that will certainly feed through into other sectors. I support this bill.
Tisch Lindsay: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5540. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! The member’s time has expired. I am calling Phil Twyford—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5539. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. The Hon Damien O’Connor—5 minutes.
Seymour David: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSeymour David: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5538. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in support of this bill. It was not without some hesitation because there have been considerable concerns about the effect of this bill on people going about their daily lives with little danger at present. I refer to people who might go walking or who perhaps use recreational vehicles on farmland or people who might have a volunteer club that occasionally employs somebody in a paid capacity. It is important that we are actually able to do those things without being stymied by excessive regulation. But I would also join all members of the House in saying that it is critical—perhaps one of the most important aspects of going to work; in fact the only aspect of going to work that really matters—that you can come home safely and I join members in expressing sympathy for those who very sadly have not done so.I have to say that if I were to take exception to some of the sentiments expressed by other members it would be when Catherine Delahunty the previous speaker said that only some of us are sad that people have tragically lost their lives in the workplace. I think that is very very unfortunate and it is an extremely unfortunate thing for a member to say. At the heart of it is the belief that “If you do not agree with my public policy remedies then you do not agree with my intentions—QED you are a bad person.” I reject that thinking. I agree with the member speaking prior to that Maurice Williamson who was truly brave and said that public policy involves difficult choices amongst realistic alternatives. Throwing one’s toys from the cot and deciding suddenly to oppose the bill on the basis that smaller businesses and low-risk businesses will not have some of the protections that the bill offers to employees of larger businesses while all the while grandstanding on a tragedy where the workers were unionised and did have representatives I take exception to.I think that this bill has found a balance between the fact that no safety precaution is costless—we do have to make choices between realistic alternatives when we make public policy. We do have to find a balance. My view is that this bill has gone through a tortuous process of making those trade-offs and I think it has got the balance right. I commend the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety and the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee members who have done that work. Ultimately on the basis of that work having been done I will be pleased to support this bill through to the next stage. Thank you.
Tisch Lindsay: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5538. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call David Seymour—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 JulyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 July[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5536. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No no—I have heard enough. I have sought advice and I refer the member to McGee page 54 which says: “Nor can the Speaker be attacked except by a direct motion of censure of which notice has been given. Any statement in the House reflecting on the Speaker either directly or indirectly is out of order;”—[Interruption] I am quoting from here and this is the ruling I am giving—“a suggestion of partiality on the part of the Speaker or any other occupant of the chair may constitute a contempt of the House. Accusations against the Speaker that reflect on the Speaker in that capacity or in respect of an office held by the Speaker ex officio … may also constitute a contempt.” Mr Mark there are measures that you can follow. I am not prepared to accept leave to table that document. I have sought advice and that is the end of the matter. There are other avenues available to you.Ron Mark: Point of order—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Well if you are going to relitigate what I have already said Mr Mark—as I said this is a serious matter.Ron Mark: It is a point of clarification. I was not aware of that ruling.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Well I have just quoted it—[Interruption] Order![Interruption] Order members! I have given you the page number and I suggest you seek advice on it. I have sought advice. There are also some Speakers’ rulings that you might like to look at. There are Speakers’ rulings 165/1 and 165/2. I have ruled on the matter and that is the end. We are moving on and I am calling Catherine Delahunty—5 minutes.
Mark Ron: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 JulyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 July[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5536. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have taken your advice Mr Assistant Speaker. I have gone to the record and pulled down the Hansard for the day in question regarding the point of order that I raised earlier. There is no mention at all in Hansard of the comment from the Speaker saying “Shut up Winston.” contrary to what you thought might be the case. I am going to ask again for the leave of the House to table the transcript from 29 July question No. 1 where Mr Speaker of the House said—
Tisch Lindsay: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5532. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Sorry; the member’s time has expired.
Tisch Lindsay: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 JulyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 July[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5530. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): If that statement was made in the House it is in Hansard and it is in the public domain.
Mark Ron: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 JulyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 July[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5530. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Yes a new point of order. This transcript is not in the public domain. I have just brought it to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 JulyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 July[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5530. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No. If that is the case that information will be public knowledge now because it will be in Hansard and it is in the public domain. So I am not going to accept that application for leave. I am calling the next speaker.Ron Mark: Point of order—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Well if you are going to relitigate what I have already ruled on Mr Mark it is a serious matter. A new point of order?
Mark Ron: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 JulyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Question No. 1 to Minister 29 July[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5530. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek the leave of the House to table a transcript just put together by the New Zealand First office of a comment made on 29 July 2015 during question time at question No. 1 where the Speaker of this House said: “Ah shut up Winston.”
Borrows Chester: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Health and Safety Reform Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5525. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am sorry to interrupt the member but his time has expired. Please take your seat.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5520. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I absolutely assure the member that I never did such a thing.
Mark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5520. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I need to draw to your attention that there is information now airing in the media that you yourself Mr Speaker swore at the leader of my party under your breath and it was caught by the microphone. Given the inconsistency with which we have been treated over here do you not think that you should withdraw and apologise?