edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Stanford EricaERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I'm pleased to take a call on the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Amendment Bill at the second reading. I really am not going to take much time on this speech; a lot of what has needed to have been said has been already said by my learned colleagues especially Mr Scott Simpson and Sarah Dowie.In the end this is a very minor technical amendment to fix up what is a drafting error in the original legislation. The intent of this bill is to give effect to existing policy settings and decisions and it was always intended that this bill provide for cost recovery of boards of inquiry in a manner consistent with boards of inquiry under the Resource Management Act. As sometimes happens in large complex bills such as this one errors can be made and indeed it was made in this bill. The upshot is that at present the costs of a board of inquiry fall on the Crown even when the applicant is applying for a marine consent for private benefit. Of course the intent was that in this instance the costs of a board of inquiry be carried by the applicant. So this amendment bill is to amend the drafting error; it correctly puts the costs back on the applicant. As expected there weren't any public submissions on this bill as it really is just a straightforward fix-up bill. The select committee process was very short in that case and it was led by our fine chair Deborah Russell in her usual extremely capable manner. The only thing that was really worth noting was the advice by the New Zealand Law Society who made a number of recommendations. It was an interesting process to be part of as a new MP because I would've expected that we had this advice in before we reported. Unfortunately we didn't. The Law Society did make a number of really interesting and quite important recommendations one of which I know is going to be taken up as a Supplementary Order Paper by the Government but I would encourage them to look at some of the other recommendations made by the Law Society. They were good recommendations that I think we need to look at quite seriously perhaps in the committee of the whole House stage. So that's really all that needs to be said about what is very much a small technical amendment to fix up what is a mistake that can often be made in such large bills. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker; I commend this bill to the House.
Salesa JennyHon JENNY SALESA (Minister for Building and Construction): Thank you so much Madam Assistant Speaker for this opportunity to speak on the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Amendment Bill. This bill is essentially about supporting good governance of our marine environment; however it is also about fairness—especially fairness to our taxpayers in carrying that task out.Our marine environment has significant value to Aotearoa New Zealand. It encompasses social spiritual and cultural dimensions. Last year we went through this particular process of passing this legislation and as you heard the Minister for Environment the Hon David Parker address this House just earlier on this was a process that was not only long but it was a process that all of us on this side of the House this year were actually against. One of the reasons why our side of the House was against this particular bill at the time was the fact that we wanted the bill to be fairer on our taxpayers.As you would have heard described—especially from the other side of the House as well—the principal Act which the bill actually amended last year unfortunately did not take into account the fact that there was an oversight in cost recovery which the member opposite Scott Simpson has just spoken about. The Resource Management Act actually allows for cost recovery to happen; however a mistake was made last year. That was not included. That is one of the reasons why we are passing this legislation under urgency as fast as we can. When you look at some of the examples from the select committee one of the examples that was given was the fact that in terms of the boards of inquiry when they're dealing with applications for the marine environment—one of the examples that was given to the select committee was that it cost over $1 million for a board of inquiry. Now when the benefit that is actually proposed is a private benefit when that benefit is not met by the private applicants but instead as it is right now is actually met by the public purse or by taxpayers overall that is not fair and that is one of the reasons why we are discussing this particular legislation now—fixing it.However can I just make a point as well that fixing legislation like this when mistakes have been done in the past is time-consuming and it does take all of us in the House to ensure that the mistakes are fixed. My hope is as we move forward that this particular bill that we're passing today actually fixes a lot of the mistakes that were made in the past. I strongly commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Prime Willow-JeanWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour): Thank you for the opportunity to be the final speaker in this debate on the first reading of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19 Modernising Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill. I am a member of the Finance and Expenditure Committee and I look forward as a member of that committee to receiving this bill shortly.I wanted to talk about a couple of things because a lot has been covered already. We know that the intent of this is to modernise our tax system and that earlier in the year we passed the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2017-18 Employment and Investment Income and Remedial Matters) Act 2018 and this bill is in addition to that. I wanted to focus on two parts in particular in here where we talk about remedial matters that need to be addressed to take into consideration and incorporate the changes we're making in the Families Package and in particular with the Best Start payment. I'm really proud that on 1 July the Best Start payment has now kicked in for those families who have babies born after 1 July.Now there is a new clause in this bill which will deal with that new payment that we've got and ensure that the policy which we intended which was that from the time that paid parental leave expires the Best Start payment will kick in—and that's another thing that I'm very proud of that paid parental leave has increased now to 22 weeks as well. So those remedial change matters are dealt with at clauses 259 through to about 264.The other part I want to talk about is the other end of life where we are focusing on KiwiSaver and that's saving for our retirement. I'm very proud of the changes that we are incorporating into this bill to enhance the KiwiSaver scheme that we have and those come as a result of the review that was done by the Retirement Commissioner and that most recent review in 2016. Some of those changes have been summarised but we're introducing the additional KiwiSaver employee contribution rates of 6 and 10 percent; reducing the minimum contributions holiday period from five years to one year—and actually as a member earlier said not referring to it as a contributions holiday but more a saving suspension; allowing over-65-year-olds to opt in to KiwiSaver acknowledging that many of our over-65s are in fact still working as well; and removing the five-year lock-in period which currently affects those who join KiwiSaver between the ages of 60 and 65.I only intend to take a short call on this draft legislation. I commend this bill to the House and I look forward to looking at it further at our select committee.
Russell DeborahDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn): This is a sad sad day in the history of this House and it is a sad sad day because for many years we have worked collaboratively across the House on tax measures. We have debated them tooth and nail in select committee to get them right but by and large when it has come to voting in the House tax bills have been passed unanimously with all sides of the House agreeing. In fact this reflects a pattern in the way that tax is done in this country. By and large people don't ask for special concessions. People don't ask for special rules. The objective of the tax professionals the tax experts within the Inland Revenue Department within the large accounting firms within law firms has been to get the tax law right. The objective between Opposition and Government has been to get the law right. So when bills have come to the House the tradition has been that that collaboration that collegiality means that bills are voted on unanimously.Yet this Opposition is seeking to undermine all that and on this sad day they have said that they will vote against this excellent tax bill. It is an excellent tax bill because of the way it improves tax administration. It's an excellent tax bill because of the way it works for the small New Zealanders for the people earning salaries and wages for the people who need to have their tax processes simplified. It is an excellent tax bill because of the way it improves some of the rules around KiwiSaver but they are still going to vote against it because it is also the annual rates bill.May I suggest to the members of the Opposition that they could have done this differently. They could perhaps at a later stage in the debate on this bill have offered a Supplementary Order Paper around those rates and have argued their case there but have still agreed to the bill overall. They had an opportunity to argue about tax rates during the Budget debate. They've had plenty of time to talk about tax rates and because of their ideological commitment to it—their ideological commitment—they are going to undermine the established tax practice in this House and that is why it is a sad sad day. Shame on them I say. Shame on you for undermining the way we do tax in this country.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Not me—not me!Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL: I agree Madam Deputy Speaker definitely not you. So members of the Opposition I invite you to reconsider. Please think again. Make sure you actively support all the—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Don't bring me into the debate.Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL: I am sorry Madam Deputy Speaker. Please members of the Opposition actively support the excellent measures in this tax bill. Perhaps consider putting in a Supplementary Order Paper if that desire to debate the tax rates is so strong. But at the end of the day do not undermine the way that we as a House have tried for so long to get tax right. I urge members of the Opposition to support this bill to vote for it and because of the excellent measures in this bill I commend it to the House.
Parker David; Mallard TrevorQuestion No. 9 to MinisterHon DAVID PARKER (Associate Minister of Finance): I should have done this at the end of my question. I seek leave to table an extract from the 2017 accounts for Te Uri o Hau Settlement Trust showing the loss to which I referred and that this remains after that loss their largest post-settlement asset.SPEAKER: I do want an assurance from the Minister that it's not a document that's publicly available.Hon David Parker: Well I got it from the web but it's certainly—SPEAKER: Well I'm not going to put that leave.
Hipkins Chris; Mallard TrevorTUESDAY 3 JULY 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.SITTINGS OF THE HOUSEHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): In accordance with what has now become a reasonably well-accepted practice around the House I seek leave for the House to suspend for the dinner break following the maiden statement of Dan Bidois this evening.SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none. I'll just inform the House that it is my intention to do what has also become a practice of the House and that is to interrupt the speaker at 5.45 rather than stopping before or afterwards so that Mr Bidois has his appropriate time.
Thursday 28 June 2018 - Volume 730
Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 112New Zealand National 56; New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; ACT New Zealand 1.Noes 8Green Party 8.Bill read a first time. Bill referred to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee.
11. Families Package—Effect on MāoriRINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) to the Associate Minister for Social DevelopmentFamilies Package—Effect on Māori11. RINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) to the Associate Minister for Social Development: Will the changes made by the Families Package from 1 July help Māori; if so how?Hon PEENI HENARE (Associate Minister for Social Development): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. He pātai pai taua pātai. [That indeed is a good question.]We know that like many New Zealand families Māori families will be amongst the 384000 families who will be better off by 2021. For instance from 1 July approximately 135000 Māori will benefit from the winter energy payment. This will automatically be granted for people residing in New Zealand who are in receipt of a working-age main benefit or those on superannuation or the veterans pension. Best Start tax credits are expected to also benefit 65000 children born each year of which 18000 are expected to be born to Māori families. Rino Tirikatene: Why is it important that the Government support Māori through its Families Package? Hon PEENI HENARE: He pātai pai taua pātai.[That indeed is a good question.]We know that Māori and Pacific people in New Zealand are much younger and better looking. The median age for Māori is 23.9 years compared to 38 for New Zealanders overall. We also know that Māori have higher birth rates compared to the general population particularly in urban centres. Māori will make up a huge part of our future workforce. Therefore ensuring that they have the best start in life is important to this Government. Rino Tirikatene: How will support for Māori families support the Government's goal of reducing child poverty? Hon PEENI HENARE: Anō he pātai pai tēnā.[That again is indeed a good question.] Māori disproportionately experience lower incomes than non-Māori. Under the Families Package low and medium income households will benefit significantly. We know that around half of all children in low-income households are Māori or Pacific. Putting more money into these households will support the Government's goal of reducing child poverty.
10. Prisons—Public-private Partnerships WaikeriaHon DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) to the Minister of CorrectionsPrisons—Public-private Partnerships Waikeria10. Hon DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) to the Minister of Corrections: Does he stand by all his statements actions and policies regarding his corrections portfolio?Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister of Corrections): Yes in the context they were made.Hon David Bennett: Does he stand by his answer to oral question No. 9 on 12 December 2017 that in relation to Waikeria Prison we don't generally do private-public partnerships."Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Let's be clear: the public-private partnership (PPP) is to build the prison but there's no way on earth that a public-private partnership is going to run Waikeria. Hon David Bennett: Has a contract for the public-private partnership for the Waikeria Prison rebuild been signed between the Department of Corrections and a private sector consortium and if so on what date? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No not yet. Hon David Bennett: Did he advise both Ministers David Clark and Grant Robertson that there had been a PPP signed by the former Government when they both repeated in the House that a PPP contract for Waikeria had been signed by the previous Government and that breaking it would cost significant sums of money to the Government? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No. Hon David Bennett: What advice has he received from corrections regarding the answers provided by Ministers David Clark and Grant Robertson in the House regarding their answers to oral questions around the Waikeria Prison PPP?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: It was just really verbal advice—exactly what I said to the first question—that a public-private partnership is going to build the prison but there's no way on earth that we're going to have a public-private partnership running the prison. That is the job of corrections. Hon David Bennett: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It was a very straight question about advice in regard to those two Ministers. Could the Minister please explain what advice he had in regard to those two Ministers and their comments? Hon Dr David Clark: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: Well hang on I've got one coming here. Is it related to that? Hon Dr David Clark: Yes. SPEAKER: Right. Well the member always has to let someone finish their point of order before I'll move on. Hon Dr David Clark: Just before you rule on that sir I fear that the member is mischaracterising the way that I spoke about that—SPEAKER: No no. Hon Dr David Clark: —and the other—SPEAKER: No the member will resume his seat. The Minister addressed the question. Is there a further supplementary? Hon David Bennett: No."
9. Families Package—Paid Parental LeaveJO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and SafetyFamilies Package—Paid Parental Leave9. JO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What additional support will be available to new families from 1 July?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): As part of our transformational Families Package the Government is making good on its plan to extend paid parental leave with the duration rising from 18 to 22 weeks. There will also be a rise in the actual payments of 4.7 percent. Better outcomes for families are one of the Government's top priorities and we'll see more of that this Sunday when the Families Package takes effect.Jo Luxton: Why increase paid parental leave?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Paid parental leave plays an important role in making sure that families have valuable support at this critical stage in their children's lives. The World Health Organization guidelines stress the importance of the first six months for babies to breastfeed and bond with their parents. The evidence is clear that these six months are crucial for infant development.Jo Luxton: What are his future plans for paid parental leave?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: The duration of paid parental leave will rise again to 26 weeks from 1 July 2020. I'm also taking advice on the merits of a wider rewrite of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act to ensure that it is fit for purpose in delivering for Kiwi families.
3. Families Package—Impact and EligibilityANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour) to the Minister for Social DevelopmentFamilies Package—Impact and Eligibility3. ANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development: What will be the impact of the Government's Families Package?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): The extra support provided by the Families Package will increase the income of 384000 families by an average of $75 per week and will lift 64000 children out of poverty by 2021; 26000 additional families will be eligible for Working for Families and 65000 families will benefit from Best Start in the first year of the Families Package alone. On top of that 1 million households will receive support for heating costs over winter through the winter energy payment. The Government is proud to be taking immediate action to provide more support for low and middle income families in New Zealand.Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki: How will people know what they are eligible for?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: One easy way to check what families are eligible for is through the new eligibility guide which I launched on Tuesday. This will make it easier for all New Zealanders to see what support they may be able to get. This website is check.msd.govt.nz. People can also check their eligibility for Working for Families through the IRD website. The Ministry of Social Development is also notifying clients of positive changes which will occur automatically such as the winter energy payment for those on a main benefit or superannuation.Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki: Will the impact of the Families Package have an effect on the economy?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Yes it will. In the Budget Economic and Fiscal Update released last month Treasury says that the coalition Government's fiscal policy including the Families Package is forecast to have a stimulatory impact on the economy. The Treasury says that This reflects strong growth in capital and operating expenditure including infrastructure investment the Families Package and other expenditure on public services." This Government's plan supports hard-working families and supports growth while putting in place the foundations for a more productive sustainable and inclusive economy.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Could the Minister tell the House if she considers the opt-out provisions on the winter heating payment to be either simple or confusing?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Absolutely simple. A letter has gone out to all those that are eligible to inform them of the winter energy payment and how it will be applied. In that letter they are given information on the fact that they can opt out and how they opt out. They are also asked to inform the Government if they will be travelling during that period as that may impact on their eligibility for the payment. We are very much looking forward to this winter energy payment that will benefit over 1 million New Zealanders."
Penk Chris; Williams PotoCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise perhaps only briefly on the Military Justice Legislation Amendment Bill. It seems to me that it's appropriate to first acknowledge those involved in the legislative process to date: the current Minister the former Minister of Justice—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I apologise to the member. Sorry to interrupt. This debate is interrupted and is set down for resumption next sitting day. The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday 3 July 2018. Pō mārie.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 6 p.m.
Local Government Regulatory Systems Amendment Bill — First Reading
Webb DuncanDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. Let's not pretend that this is the most exciting bill that's come before this House and it might even win a competition for being the most boring. But you know I love it for that—Simeon Brown: This is Parliament. Don't play down the seriousness of this place.Dr DUNCAN WEBB: —because these bills are really really important. As Mr Simeon Brown who's yapping away over there which is quite apposite for this bill would well know from the Regulations Review Committee—he blinks and blinks there as he looks at the page in front of him—detail is important. The people who have to work with this legislation absolutely need to have workable legislation. This isn't—Simeon Brown: Name one thing the bill does. Tell us your favourite clause.Dr DUNCAN WEBB: This bill does five great things. Not only does it improve electoral systems in the Local Government Act—Simeon Brown: How?Dr DUNCAN WEBB: —by enabling—Mr Simeon Brown you're going to bite off a bit more than you can chew very soon yap yapping off there in the corner. It does it Mr Brown by allowing electoral officers to expand the way in which they recruit electors so that marginalised communities can be better approached to engage in the electoral process. But you know what? It's really important—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! Order! The use of you"—Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Sorry Madam Assistant Speaker. It is important that one has these important reviews of detailed legislation.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! Members can we just have a little bit of order. I'd like to hear the speech thank you.Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Sorry those newer members are a bit excitable on the backbench of the other side. I can entirely understand as it's late on a Thursday.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Not helpful Dr Webb.Dr DUNCAN WEBB: I'll try to be helpful from here on in. My real point was this: that these kinds of technical reviews are an important part of the legislative process. I commend the Minister for taking the time essentially to do a clean-up to make sure that there's a whole lot of what appear to be minor things out there—officials who have to work with this kind of legislation desperately need to know things like what "a working day" means for when a notice of appeal comes into a local government. We may think it's trivial but for the person who's wanting advice on when to put that notice of appeal in it can be a very very important thing indeed. And indeed the definition of what an assisting animal or dog is—that's very important for exactly these kinds of things.So I'm not going to spend a lot of time in this House talking about it but I do absolutely commend the work that the Minister has done here to make sure that the job of officials in local government is made easier more effective more productive and more efficient. Thank you very much."
Hughes GarethGARETH HUGHES (Green): Kia ora Mr Speaker. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou kia ora. I rise to take a very brief call in support of this legislation. It's an omnibus bill. I understand the genesis was the 2014 Productivity Commission report into local government essentially modernising streamlining reducing costs and inefficiencies in the local government space.One area in particular I'm going to be following up in detail in the select committee is the changes to the Dog Control Act 1996. Here they're going to replace the definition of a disability assist dog" and align the notification requirements of local authorities. It's something I've heard from animal welfare groups and advocates—that we do need to improve the status and the public visibility of disability assist dogs. Most commonly people are aware of guide dogs and vision-impaired dogs but as we've seen particularly in the US a number of other assistant functions of dogs have been recognised in US law—most notably I think in California where dogs are allowed on public transport they're used to assist in reducing anxiety mental health issues. It's becoming more and more common in New Zealand but without a common identifier we have seen conflicts overseas where people have tried to bring a dog into a business and have been removed and we've seen legal challenges as a result. I think we're going to see more of these cases in New Zealand. So the idea of a common regulatory function and a common visibility function for disability assist dogs potentially in a wider context will be a very interesting issue to raise in the select committee. The Government recently held an animal welfare hui where a number of dog cat and companion animal groups sent a very clear message to the Government. There are a number of issues in terms of the Dog Control Act which also need modernising in terms of potentially looking at the regulation of breeding: how dogs are bred and the conditions in which they're bred. We're seeing the rise of dog sales on TradeMe and other online platforms where perhaps the animal welfare standards aren't as high as many Kiwis would expect. So there are still a number of issues with dogs and companion animals in New Zealand that the local government legislation deals with. We very much support modernising it to make sure those animals get a fair go. Where they're used as companion animals for disability assistance we want to make sure that there's a good modern robust regime. So look we support this very common-sense reasonable omnibus bill. We'll be looking at this area in particular amongst the various issues raised."
Yang JianLOCAL GOVERNMENT REGULATORY SYSTEMS AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 26 June.Dr JIAN YANG (National): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's good to come back to my speech. Poorly designed and implemented regulatory arrangements could result in significant costs in terms of business productivity and profitability and the wealth of individuals and families. In the end the country as a whole will suffer because the country's economic performance and well-being will be negatively affected.New Zealand has a very large and complex regulatory sector made up of 200 or so regulatory regimes. More than 10000 people work in regulatory roles so it is a very complex regime. The local government legislative framework that we are dealing with now is also a very complex arrangement of multiple Acts and these Acts are amended from time to time and sometimes we do not get everything right. Sometimes those changes in various Acts can be inconsistent. It is therefore necessary for us to come back and rectify these errors. This bill is also a direct response to the New Zealand Productivity Commission's 2014 report on regulatory institutions and practices. This report has noted some major issues that we need to pay attention to. For example two-thirds of regulator chief executives reported they had to work with legislation that is outdated or not fit for purpose. Only 10 percent of the businesses surveyed believed that regulatory requirements in New Zealand were rarely or never contradictory or incompatible with each other. The report also notes that it can be difficult to find time on the parliamentary calendar for repairs and maintenance of existing legislation. As a result regulatory agencies often have to work with legislation that is out of date or not fit for purpose. Now the changes in this bill are minor. Nevertheless they help to improve and maintain the effectiveness and efficiency of our legislative regime or regulatory system. For instance this bill will reduce local governments' filing compliance costs. According to law local governments are required to file some documents with some Government agencies. While this is a very good public service it can incur costs. This bill will require local governments to file certain documents online—to make these documents online—instead of filing these documents in hard copy with Government agencies because these documents have low value as notifications. They are mainly for public record and for public accessibility. So by requiring these local governments to make these documents available on the website instead of them filing them with Government agencies this will reduce the cost and also will make accessibility even better.So this is a good bill. I commend it to the House. Thank you.
Insolvency Practitioners Bill — Discharged
Curran ClareINSOLVENCY PRACTITIONERS BILLDischarge and Referral to Economic Development Science and Innovation CommitteeHon CLARE CURRAN (Minister of Broadcasting Communications and Digital Media) on behalf of the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: I move That the order of the day for the committee of the whole House stage of the Insolvency Practitioners Bill be discharged and that the bill be referred to the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee for the consideration of SOP No 45 in the name of the Hon Kris Faafoi.Motion agreed to.
Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Claims Settlement Bill — Third Reading
Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee
Points of Order — Written Questions—Content of Answers
Speaker's Rulings — Written Questions — Content of Answers
Finlayson ChristopherHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National): Yes the Opposition supports these changes. In the immortal words of the Acting Prime Minister using the only Latin he knows res ipsa loquitur.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 44 in the name of the Hon Andrew Little be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Parts 1 to 3 Schedules 1 to 3 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.House resumed.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.
Little AndrewParts 1 to 3 Schedules 1 to 3 and clauses 1 and 2Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations): For the benefit of the members of Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki who are in the gallery we just have a small technical issue to get through which is some technical amendments to the bill which we're about to get into the third reading of. So we're in a process called the committee of the whole House which allows amendment to the bill before we get to the final stage. In this regard as mentioned at the second reading of the Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Claims Settlement Bill the Māori Affairs Committee reported the bill back to this House on 29 March and recommended it be passed without amendments. The Supplementary Order Paper that is before the committee right now will make some minor technical changes to nine clauses and one schedule of the bill. Most of the amendments relate to a timing adjustment for one shared redress property with the Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Claims Settlement Bill progressing ahead of settlements with other iwi of Hauraki.One other amendment is required to reflect changes to the ministerial portfolios covering the responsibilities of the Ministry for Primary Industries. That relates to the protocol regarding that ministry. I'd like to thank the Parliamentary Counsel Office for its thoroughness in ensuring the accuracy of the legislation passed by this committee and I commend this Supplementary Order Paper with the 10 changes proposed in the matter before the committee now.
Finlayson Christopher; Rurawhe AdrianNGĀI TAI KI TĀMAKI CLAIMS SETTLEMENT BILLIn CommitteeHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I suggest that the bill could be taken as one part. There's nothing overly contentious here.The CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears not.
Parker DavidTRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (CPTPP) AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingHon DAVID PARKER (Minister for Trade and Export Growth): I move That the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee to consider the bill.
Hipkins ChrisPOINTS OF ORDERSpeakers' Rulings—Written Questions Content of AnswersHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. At the beginning of question time today you made a ruling regarding written question answers that my colleague the Hon Phil Twyford had put forward. I have had a chance now to look at those questions. I know that you have written to me about this matter as well.I can certainly understand the concern that you have raised about some of the answers that my colleague has given and I agree with you that some of the flippant comments that he has made in those do not reflect well on the House. However the question that I would like to raise with you is around some of the ironic expressions that are made in some of the questions themselves and whether in fact one or two of those answers were appropriate given the context of the question. For example in question No. 11652 the operable part of the question was how many more sleeps are required before a decision is made regarding KiwiBuild eligibility rules and income testing?" to which the Minister replied "it depends how frequently the member sleeps". The point that I would make there is that the question itself did set itself up for that kind of answer. So—[Interruption]SPEAKER: No you will sit down.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I fully understand a more rigorous approach to the answers and I wouldn't contest that at all. The question that I would ask of you Mr Speaker is that a rigorous approach is also taken to the accepting of the written questions themselves because some of these questions do invite answers that would perhaps not reflect well on the House because the questions themselves don't reflect well on the House.SPEAKER: I can deal with that point of order very easily. If the Minister of Housing and Urban Development had not used the expression "not many more sleeps" in this House to the member when she asked the oral question then I would not have allowed it in the written question. The original offence the original irony was quoted from the Hon Phil Twyford and from my perspective that is an acceptable use within a written question. If the Minister had not used the expression he wouldn't have been subject to what looks like an ironic question but actually is just a straight response to what was almost certainly an inappropriate comment that he made in the Chamber.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Are you therefore ruling that the phrase "so many sleeps" is out of order—because that is an answer that has been given for many many many questions in the House.SPEAKER: No no I'm not doing that. But what I am indicating is that when that is quoted or used in a written question which relates to the answer given in the House I'm not going to rule it out whereas if it didn't have a context then at that stage it could well be considered ironic."
Hipkins Chris; Brownlee GerryBUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Consideration of legislation next week will include the first readings of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19 Modernising Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill and the Maritime Powers Extension Bill; the second readings of the Courts Matters Bill and the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill which are cognated; the committee stage of the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill; and the remaining stages of the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Amendment Bill and the Ngāti Tamaoho Claims Settlement Bill.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): Noting that ambitious programme from the Government next week can I ask the Leader of the House once again what his intentions are for No. 27 on the Order Paper the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): The Government has no current plans to progress with that legislation in its current form. If that changes I'll keep the member posted.
Mallard TrevorTHURSDAY 28 JUNE 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.SPEAKER'S RULINGSWritten Questions—Content of AnswersSPEAKER: Replies to some written questions to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development have been drawn to my attention. In particular I have considered the answers to written questions Nos 12234 12225 11652 11710 and 11715. The answers are an abuse of the written question process. In my view they show a contempt for the accountability which a Minister has to this House. The Minister knows that they would be completely unacceptable as answers to oral questions and the same rules apply. Ministers are required to endeavour to give informative replies to questions—Speaker's ruling 177/5. While the Speaker is not responsible for the quality of answers I do expect Ministers to make a serious attempt to provide an informative answer. These questions do not come close to meeting that standard. As a result of these answers that I have seen I rule that: (1) the Minister will provide substantive amended answers to the questions concerned by midday on Tuesday 3 July; and (2) since the Opposition has been denied an opportunity to use written questions to scrutinise the Government in a timely manner they will receive an additional 20 supplementary oral questions to be used by the end of next week.I have also written to the Minister indicating a form of reply he is using to avoid giving substantive answers is unacceptable and that he has until next Thursday to provide corrected answers.
Wednesday 27 June 2018 - Volume 730
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 46 in the name of Clayton Mitchell to the proposed amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 39 in the name of Jan Logie be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments to the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 56; ACT New Zealand 1.Amendments to the amendments agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 47 in the name of Clayton Mitchell to the proposed amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 39 in the name of Jan Logie be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments to the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 56; ACT New Zealand 1.Amendments to the amendments agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 42 in the name of the Hon Mark Mitchell to the proposed amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 39 in the name of Jan Logie be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment to the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 56New Zealand National 56.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment to the amendments not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 41 in the name of the Hon Mark Mitchell to the proposed amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 39 in the name of Jan Logie be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment to the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 56New Zealand National 56.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment to the amendments not agreed to.The question was put that the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 39 in the name of the Hon Jan Logie be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 56; ACT New Zealand 1.Amendments as amended agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Parts 1 to 5 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 56; ACT New Zealand 1.Parts 1 to 5 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.House resumed.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.
Domestic Violence—Victims' Protection Bill — In Committee
12. Housing Supply—Measures to IncreaseDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Minister of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHousing Supply—Measures to Increase12. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development: What is the most effective measure he has put in place to increase housing supply since he received his ministerial warrant?Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Housing and Urban Development): There are so many and they are so interdependent that it's difficult to single out one most effective measure. However one important initiative was standing up for a 25-home Housing New Zealand development on Banff Avenue and calling out that member's stigmatising of State house tenants. David Seymour: Is that really an answer becoming of a Minister with such a large job in front of him? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Yes because the issues of nimbyism of urban intensification and of affordable housing in our big cities have to be dealt with and addressed fairly and squarely. But we do have an urban growth agenda that is designed to increase the supply of housing—SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member's answered the question. David Seymour: Is the member's performance answering these questions today any clue as to why the new dwelling consents have not increased at all since he's been Minister any more than the trend he inherited? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: We've inherited a market that is consistently underpowered and has failed to meet demand and that's why we have an urban growth agenda that includes reforming the planning system. It includes bringing in new sources of finance for infrastructure to support urban growth more ambitious spatial planning between central government and local government and a far more ambitious reform agenda than was ever attempted under the last nine years. David Seymour: Supplementary—SPEAKER: No the member's had two.
10. Defence Force—Navy Patrol Vessel ActivityDARROCH BALL (NZ First) to the Minister of DefenceDefence Force—Navy Patrol Vessel Activity10. DARROCH BALL (NZ First) to the Minister of Defence: What recent reports has he seen regarding Navy patrol vessel activity?Hon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): Yesterday I saw a report about the successful ongoing deployment of the inshore patrol vessel HMNZS Taupo to Fiji. I was particularly pleased to hear that the combined operation on its first patrol confiscated the entire catch of six commercial fishing vessels that were alleged to have been fishing illegally inside the Quelelevu lagoon which is traditional fishing ground. This is part of Operation Wasawasa II where New Zealand and Fiji are working together to help patrol Fiji's exclusive economic zone and enforce regulations for inshore fishing. Working with HMNZS Taupo are sailors from both the New Zealand and Fijian navies and fisheries officers from both New Zealand and Fiji as well. I'd like to congratulate the commanding officer of Taupo Lieutenant Ben Flight and his crew for their outstanding work.Darroch Ball: How does Operation Wasawasa II support the Government's Pacific reset?Hon RON MARK: Navy patrols into the Pacific help aid regional prosperity and security which is of fundamental importance to New Zealand. The Pacific faces a growing array of challenges. The strategic environment is also changing and becoming more contested. Recognising this New Zealand has announced a reset of our approach to the region. Joint operations such as Wasawasa II are an important aspect of the Government's focus on building deeper partnerships in cooperation with Pacific Island nations and assisting them in building their capability and capacity to effectively monitor and patrol and police their own territorial waters. This deeper and more mature partnership reinforces the significant increase to New Zealand's official development assistance in the Pacific.SPEAKER: Can I just say: both answers have been too long.Darroch Ball: What further deployments to Fiji of navy patrol vessels will take place this year?Hon RON MARK: In mid-August HMNZS Taupo will be replaced by the offshore patrol vessel Otago. Otago being a larger vessel will conduct patrols much further out to sea giving Fijian authorities even greater reach. Fishing in Fiji is their third-largest natural resource sector—SPEAKER: OK thank you. I think the member has answered.Darroch Ball: What additional activity are navy patrol vessels conducting within New Zealand's exclusive economic zone?Hon RON MARK: Go navy. Recently the inshore patrol vessel Hawea completed a three-day fisheries patrol on the West Coast of the South Island. Guided by information from an Air Force Orion and working with officials from the Ministry for Primary Industries Hawea boarded 11 vessels over a 72-hour period including six vessels of interest—Hon Grant Robertson: How many?Hon RON MARK: Six vessels of interest. Six infringements were detected and this patrol is the sixth patrol conducted so far this year by our navy. I'd like to congratulate Lieutenant Troy Gordon and his crew who are doing an outstanding job.