edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Andersen Ginny; Mitchell MarkHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour): Thank you very much Madam Chair. Look I'm just interested to learn a bit more about the Firearms Safety Authority. That was funded under the previous Budget—Te Tari Pūreke. I'm just interested to know from the Minister of Police can he talk us through how the system would operate if it was to be moved out of police and in particular how would the intelligence that's very vital for front-line safety—if it was sitting in the Department of Internal Affairs how do the national intelligence agency and front-line police quickly access intelligence about who may have attempted to buy a firearm? I'm thinking of a scenario when an officer's approaching a house and there could have been a purchase that day that's been declined under the Firearms Safety Authority. If it's moved how will that interaction happen to protect front-line safety?Hon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police): Yeah thank you Mr Chair. As the member knows that's an ongoing piece of work but the one thing that I would say to her is that we are fully committed as a Government to make our country more safe not less safe and the police have got a huge role to play in terms of dealing with firearms and public safety. And whatever the model is once this piece of work is finished Police will have absolute full access to all the intelligence all the information that they need to keep the public safe and to keep their front-line officers safe.Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour): Thank you very much. There have been reports that the cost of shifting Te Tari Pūreke out of Police into somewhere like the Department of Internal Affairs would cost around $100 million. What advice or reports has the Minister of Police received in relation to the cost of that shift?Hon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police): Thank you Mr Chair. Well again as I say to the member that is an ongoing piece of work. No decisions have been made as of today. The Hon Nicole McKee is leading that piece of work with support from Police. We are making it very clear through that process that the access to intelligence and the ability for police to be able to do their job to keep the public safe and keep our front-line police officers safe needs to be enhanced not degraded.Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour): Thank you very much Mr Chair. In relation to intelligence there's been a project that's been under way for a while within Police—ReFrame—which enables police to have access to good intelligence technology and using non-sworn to get back out on the street quickly. I'd be interested to know if there's any proposal from the Minister of Police to pause or halt that programme of work.Hon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police): Thank you Mr Chair. As the member knows that's looking forward and that's Budget sensitive. What I would say is that intelligence is critically important to the efficient running of our police service and they are constantly looking at ways of being able to increase that.
Wednesday 21 February 2024 - Volume 773
Bishop Chris; Brownlee GerrySITTINGS OF THE HOUSEHon CHRIS BISHOP (Leader of the House): I move That this House adjourn until 2 p.m. on Tuesday 27 February 2024.Motion agreed to.SPEAKER: The House stands adjourned until Tuesday 27 February.The House adjourned at 2.25 p.m.
Death of Member — Fa'anānā Efeso Collins
Sepuloni CarmelHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Deputy Leader—Labour): Ua ou tau le taua lelei ua iʻu ia te aʻu le tausinioga ua ou taofi i le faʻatuatua. Fa'anānā Efeso Collins you fought the good fight you finished the race and you remained faithful. I stand before this House to express the Labour Party and our Pacific caucus' deep sadness and shock at the loss of our friend our colleague our Samoan brother. No one in this House expected that Efeso's maiden speech would serve as his farewell speech to us all.Many of us have known Efeso for decades not just years. Many of us studied with and/or worked with Efeso over the course of those decades. Many of us have been on the receiving end of his support and his criticism; such was the man who never shied away from sharing his views. I knew Efeso from university days. He was and continued to be a force to be reckoned with. Whilst a fighter his ability to use humour to put people at ease and defuse situations was unparalleled. It would have been impossible for anyone to not know who Efeso was. He was a vocal advocate for workers for the poor for the vulnerable for students for our young people for South Auckland and for our Pasifika community. His priorities never wavered; they were God family and serving his community. Efeso may not have found his eventual home with the Labour Party but he continued to be part of our family. He may have moved out of our fale but he only moved to the fale next door. Our connection and history was too long and deep for that tie to be severed. Losing Efeso is a loss to our country and to our Pasifika community. There will be a gaping hole left in so many spaces. He called out racism. He challenged discrimination and unfairness. He held individuals systems agencies and organisations to account. He also shouted from the rooftops the amazingness and the aspirations of our Pasifika community. To the Green Party we acknowledge your loss and we all share with you in the mourning that you are experiencing now; we mourn with you. Mostly we cannot stop thinking of Efeso's beautiful wife Fia and his two daughters. He was so proud of his wife and daughters. We pray that they are strengthened by the people around them wanting to bring comfort over the coming days months and years. O le ala i le pule o le tautua"—"The pathway to leadership is through service". Fa'anānā Efeso Collins you lived by this Samoan proverb. You led through service you were a leader and your legacy of service and leadership will be remembered."
Luxon ChristopherRt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): E te rangatira Fa'anānā Efeso taonga o te mate haere atu rā. Ka nui te mihi ki a koe me tō whānau.[Noble leader Fa'anānā Efeso paragon of the departed farewell. Warm sentiments to you and your family.]On behalf of the coalition Government I join with James Shaw and all of the Green Party and this whole House in expressing our immense shock and sadness at the passing of Fa'anānā Efeso Collins. I acknowledge Efeso's wife Fia and their two young daughters who sat in this place only just last week as James just said to hear the husband and the father that they love so much deliver his maiden speech. Our thoughts and prayers are with them as they process the shock and the unspeakable sense of loss and grief that they feel today.I met Efeso almost two years ago and in fact the two of us caught up just a couple of weeks ago and we were talking about balancing family and work life in this place and his hopes for starting out here. In all my interactions with him Efeso was always so friendly gracious generous kind positive and collaborative with a lovely sense of humour. He certainly lived by the words he uttered in his maiden speech which was to lead with the spirit of peace and love and service. He was what I would call a true servant leader.I also acknowledge the loss his community will be feeling today too. He was so deeply committed to public service and a true champion and advocate for his Samoan and South Auckland communities in the various leadership roles that he held over the decades. He was just getting started in this place in Parliament and I think he had a promising political career. Efeso came to this place with the same grace and humility and mana he brought to all of his work as an advocate for those that he represented. I have no doubt that he would have been very successful and very good for this Parliament and this place.Finally can I acknowledge the loss that both the Green Party and the Labour Party will be feeling today having lost a dear colleague and friend. All the members of this House extend our support to you.The Government's deepest sympathies are of course with Efeso's family the loved ones and his colleagues. Efeso alofa atu. Moe mai rā moe mai rā.
Shaw JamesHon JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): Amuia le masina e alu ma toe sau. Today we say goodbye to an extraordinary man: a man of service who believed that his life's work was to deliver a better life for those who followed a proud son of the Pacific a community leader a father a husband a brother.To Efeso's beloved family: his wife Fia and their two daughters—you gave him strength and purpose and joy and friendship and love and support. The thoughts of everyone here and around Aotearoa are with you.I'd like to pass on our gratitude to the staff and the volunteers of ChildFund. Your work meant so much to him and I know that you will feel his loss deeply.To those who cared for Efeso this morning: thank you. We know that you did everything that you could for him and we are grateful.One of the first things that you notice about Efeso is his graciousness his huge smile and his reassuring voice. He was joyful he was funny he was kind and thoughtful. He conducted himself quietly and kindly and gracefully. He worked for change not by forcing his ideas on others but by listening and seeking out ideas from others. He was a man full of empathy a man who knew that the first step towards change is an open heart a man who embodied the idea that our work here is to serve the communities that we represent; to be their voice for change.Efeso Collins was a good man. He was called to come to Parliament because of what he could see of the worsening poverty the inadequate incomes the profound inequities that affect and shape Pacific communities that he came from. Aotearoa needed him. We needed him. Every day that Efeso came to work I know that he carried the expectation of his South Auckland community. It was a responsibility that he wore solemnly but he also made it look easy—fun even.Six days ago standing right here in this House Efeso Collins delivered his maiden speech. It must also now serve as his valedictory. He spoke of his journey here. He spoke of his love for his family and that evening Efeso was joined in celebration by some of his closest friends and family. There's a photo from the evening which captures one of Efeso's daughters dancing in full Samoan dress; behind her slightly out of focus is her proud father our friend with the biggest—the biggest—smile on his face. To his girls: your dad will be your valentines for ever.None of us can ever know how long we're going to be here. All we can do is to live our lives as best we can with purpose with love and joy; to use each day to show those closest to us how much we love and care about them; to treat others with respect and kindness; and to strive to make the world a better place. Efeso showed us what that means every single day and the best way to honour him is to follow his example.Fa'anānā Efeso Collins led a life full of love. He showed us how each moment each day each choice we make is an act of love. Closing his maiden speech Efeso said Love is an act of courage not fear; love is a commitment to others. No matter where the oppressed are found the act of love is a commitment to their cause the cause of liberation." Ia manuia lau malaga. Farewell on your journey my friend."
Brownlee GerryDEATH OF MEMBERFa'anānā Efeso CollinsSPEAKER: Members it's my sad duty to formally inform the House of the death of our colleague Fa'anānā Efeso Collins who served as a Green MP in this Parliament. I extend my sympathy and prayers to his family—aroha to them—and acknowledge his contribution to the public life of New Zealand. Members there will be an occasion in the very near future in a few weeks where those who wish to express their feelings towards our late colleague can do so but today is a day for the formal recognition. Accordingly we'll hear from specified speakers. At the end of those speeches there'll be a waiata which is on your desk and following the waiata I'd ask members to stand for a moment's silence to mark the respect we have for our late colleague. I call on the Hon James Shaw.
Brownlee GerryWEDNESDAY 21 FEBRUARY 2024The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSSPEAKER: Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom justice mercy and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
4. Question No. 4—FinanceHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 4—Finance4. Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of Finance: Does she stand by her answers to oral questions on Tuesday 21 May? Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): Well yes and I particularly stand by my statement that I happen to believe that one of the greatest things we can do for productivity is send New Zealanders the message that there will be reward for their hard work."Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she stand by her statement "These savings and revenue initiatives are the same as those in the National Party's tax plan with some adjustment to reflect coalition agreements."; if so where in the coalition agreement does it say that first-home grants will be scrapped? Hon NICOLA WILLIS: In answer to the first part of the question yes. In answer to the second part of the question the member should've listened to the rest of the answers in which I said "Tax relief in the Budget will be fully funded through savings and revenue initiatives. These savings and revenue initiatives are the same as those in the National Party's tax plan with some adjustments to reflect coalition agreements. There will also"—[Interruption]—and the members should listen because clearly members didn't listen yesterday—"be other savings in the Budget. These savings will be directed towards Government priorities including front-line public services." including social housing for our most vulnerable New Zealanders. Hon Barbara Edmonds: Why has she chosen to support landlords with a $2.9 billion tax break but cut the funding to help first-home buyers? Hon NICOLA WILLIS: We have chosen to support renters because we don't want to see the acceleration in rents they faced under that Government and we are taking policy actions to put downward pressure on rents. Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she stand by her statement "These savings and revenue initiatives are the same as those in the National Party's tax plan."; if so can she rule out a foreign buyers tax? Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Yes and yes—and I can't wait to show you what this Government has done next week. Hon Barbara Edmonds: Are there any new revenue initiatives not contained in the coalition agreements or the National Party tax plan that Kiwis can expect in the Budget? Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Eight more sleeps."
3. Question No. 3—FinanceTIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 3—Finance3. TIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato) to the Minister of Finance: What does the operating balance excluding gains and losses (OBEGAL) measure?Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): The operating balance excluding gains and losses commonly known as the OBEGAL is the difference between total Crown revenue and total Crown expenses before gains and losses. Gains and losses arise from changes in the value of the Government's assets and liabilities—for example changes in market prices of equity investments. OBEGAL is a total Crown measure so it includes the financial results of Crown entities and State-owned enterprises. Tim van de Molen: Is the OBEGAL in surplus or deficit?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The OBEGAL is in deficit and has been since 2019. It is in deficit because Government spending has increased markedly. Now while some spending increases over recent years were temporary—for example in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the North Island weather events—there was a permanent increase in other areas. So after stripping out large one-off expenses and adjusting for the economic cycle the Treasury estimates a structural operating deficit of around 1.5 percent of GDP in the current financial year. A structural deficit members is not sustainable in the long term as it requires continual borrowing to cover expenses leading to a never-ending accumulation of public debt—a debt spiral. That is the mess our Government is cleaning up.Tim van de Molen: What is the Government's response to this situation?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Fiscal consolidation is required over time to bring revenue and expenses back into balance. As set out in the Budget Policy Statement the Government is committed to reducing core Crown expenses as a proportion of GDP and returning the OBEGAL to surplus. These fiscal goals have become harder to achieve as economic forecasts have deteriorated. I can tell the House that the forecasts have continued to deteriorate even since the Budget Policy Statement. None the less the Government remains committed to its fiscal strategy and will set out a plan to return to surplus.Tim van de Molen: When will the OBEGAL return to surplus?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: That will be set out in the fiscal projections and forecasts released as part of the Budget. But what I can tell the House is that in the current economic circumstances if we continued with the future Budget operating allowances in the half-year update which was set by the previous Government there might not be a surplus posted in New Zealand until 2030-31. As a responsible Government we will not be doing that.
Kuriger Barbara; Meager James; Penk ChrisIMMIGRATION (MASS ARRIVALS) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteePart 1 Applications for visas and entry permissionCHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): We come first to the Immigration (Mass Arrivals) Amendment Bill and we begin with the debate on Part 1. Part 1 is the debate on clauses 4 to 6 Applications for visas and entry permission". The question is that Part 1 stand part.JAMES MEAGER (National—Rangitata): Point of order Madam Chairperson. I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question. CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): Leave is sought for that intention. Is there any objection? There is objection.Hon CHRIS PENK (Associate Minister of Immigration): Thank you Madam Chair and good evening to all members of this committee of the whole House. Representing my colleague and friend Erica Stanford in relation to this bill I make just brief comment on the nature of Part 1 and of course I look forward to the discussion by members who are minded to contribute to the debate.The spirit of Part 1 is very much around providing clarity where it does not currently exist in the Immigration Act. This is reference of course to the situation of what we call mass arrivals. So clause 4 then is going to amend a situation where it's currently unclear whether members of a mass arrival group would be considered passengers. So just to define "passengers" in distinction from a group of mass arrivals and that would go to for example the question of whether there were a rescue at sea and whether those human beings who were involved in that might be regarded as passengers or not. Therefore the implications for that we'll see in further clauses because of course the treatment of those within a mass arrival group is deliberately and significantly and importantly—but still humanely—different from those who are making an individual arrival and are able to apply for and indeed are required to apply for visas on their own individual terms.Clause 5: again there is a lack of clarity currently about whether members of a mass arrival group have the ability to apply for entry permission and a visa. They will under this bill have the ability to do so under clause 6(1) which is amending section 103(1) of the principal Act by inserting new paragraph (daa). That will oblige them to apply and then the following clause which is also amending section 103 will state that effectively if they haven't applied then nevertheless they can be treated as though they had. It would be an anomaly to essentially privilege a mass arrival group in the event that they hadn't actually applied and therefore had been denied such permission. So with that I welcome our discussion on Part 1."
Kuriger BarbaraHOUSE IN COMMITTEECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): Members the House is in committee on the Immigration (Mass Arrivals) Amendment Bill and the Māori Fisheries Amendment Bill.
9. Question No. 9—PoliceJOSEPH MOONEY (National—Southland) to the Minister of PoliceQuestion No. 9—Police9. JOSEPH MOONEY (National—Southland) to the Minister of Police: What recent announcements has Police made about the policing of gangs?Hon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police): The Police Commissioner has announced the formation of a national gang unit and district level gang disruption units made up of both new and reprioritised resources. These teams will have a laser focus on the disruption and enforcement of gangs. The new gang units will create and enhance new operational capability in combating gangs. They'll add significant capability to suppress gangs their networks supply chains and violent intimidating and antisocial behaviour.Joseph Mooney: Does he agree with commentators that gangs will ignore police?Hon MARK MITCHELL: No I totally reject that. Our police officers are an extension of our communities and threats made against them are made against all of us. We have one of the most professional and capable police forces in the world. I have no doubt that they have the ability to be able to enforce the law and keep the public safe.Joseph Mooney: What additional powers is the Government giving police to use?Hon MARK MITCHELL: The Government has announced several new powers for police including the banning of patches and insignia in public dispersal notices consorting prohibition notices and strengthened firearms prohibition orders with warrantless search powers.Joseph Mooney: How does this announcement from Police support the Government's priorities?Hon MARK MITCHELL: This is a strong step in the right direction and sends a clear message to gangs and organised crime groups that they are no longer operating in a permissive environment or above the law. Restoring law and order is a key priority for this coalition Government.Hon Ginny Andersen: Does he agree with the Dairy and Business Owners Group spokesperson Sunny Kaushal who said While the new Government was elected with high hopes it is yet to meet our expectations"?Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well I agree a lot with Sunny Kaushal and I was very pleased to be with him on the weekend at a public meeting in Hamilton where he said that he is very happy with the work that this Government is doing and he is looking forward to working even more closely with us."
7. Question No. 7—TransportTIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of TransportQuestion No. 7—Transport7. TIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of Transport: What recent announcements has he made on roads of regional significance?Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Transport): The Government has announced roads of regional significance to sit alongside roads of national significance as part of our plan to get transport back on track. Two roads of national significance and 10 roads of regional significance will replace roading projects in the New Zealand Upgrade Programme. The New Zealand Upgrade Programme's roading projects were subject to significant cost blowouts that resulted in project cancellations and delays across the country. These changes get these roading projects back on track.Tim Costley: Why has the Government made changes to road projects in the New Zealand Upgrade Programme?Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well when we came to Government we were advised that there would be a significant funding gap of up to $1.5 billion to deliver the roading projects in the New Zealand Upgrade Programme. The Government has made tough choices to get this programme of roading projects back on track. Two of these projects will now be delivered as roads of national significance. Ten will be delivered as roads of regional significance. Two will be progressed to be delivery-ready with funding decisions made once procurement for major projects within the package are confirmed and two will be prioritised for funding within the Government policy statement on transport.Tim Costley: Why has the Government delegated decision making on project scope and delivery to New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA)?Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well our Government has delegated decision making on project scope and delivery to NZTA to provide much-needed certainty of delivery to communities across the country and to ensure the programme stays within budget. This ensures decisions can be made by the NZTA board on budget cost and scope; they can appropriately manage the risk; and ensure value for money for taxpayers. We expect the New Zealand Transport Agency board to deliver these projects within the $6.5 billion funding envelope for this programme. Tim Costley: Can the Minister tell us how roads of regional significance fit into the Government's transport plan?Hon SIMEON BROWN: Our Government is focused on delivering a transport system that boosts productivity and economic growth. Prioritising the delivery of roads of national significance and roads of regional significance across New Zealand provides much-needed certainty of delivery to communities across the country. It is a part of our plan to rebuild the economy.
2. Question No. 2—FinanceMILES ANDERSON (National—Waitaki) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 2—Finance2. MILES ANDERSON (National—Waitaki) to the Minister of Finance: What announcements has she made about the operating allowance for Budget 2024?Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): I said in the Budget Policy Statement that the operating allowance for Budget 2024 will be less than $3.5 billion—$3.5 billion members may recall was the operating allowance for Budget 2024 set by the previous Government. I will announce the actual number on Budget day but I can confirm today to the House that it will be under $3.5 billion.Miles Anderson: What does the operating allowance cover?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The operating allowance is the amount available in the Budget for discretionary spending and revenue initiatives. Importantly allowances are a net concept. They include savings as well as spending. The operating allowance in Budget 2024 will cover spending increases and revenue reductions as well as offsetting savings initiatives and some revenue-raising. The total of all of these adds up to less than $3.5 billion.Miles Anderson: Will tax relief be funded through savings?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Yes. Tax relief in the Budget will be fully funded through savings and revenue initiatives. These savings and revenue initiatives are the same as those in the National Party's tax plan with some adjustments to reflect coalition agreements. There will also be other savings in the Budget. These savings will be directed towards Government priorities including front-line public services.Miles Anderson: How does a less than $3.5 billion operating allowance compare to those in recent years?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The allowance for Budget 2022 which members will recall was the year when inflation hit 7.3 percent—Hon Shane Jones: How much?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: —7.3 percent. The allowance in that Budget was $5.9 billion plus more than $6 billion over the forecast period for the cost of living payment and other spending outside allowances. The allowance for Budget 2023 was relatively modest by comparison at only $4.8 billion. So the allowance in Budget 2024 of less than $3.5 billion no matter how less than is a lot more fiscally responsible than those delivered in the last few irresponsible Budgets.
Brown SimeonORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 6 to Minister 9 May—Amended AnswerHon SIMEON BROWN (Minister for Energy): Point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to make a personal explanation to correct a statement I made regarding low residual notices in question No. 6 on 9 May 2024.SPEAKER: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.Hon SIMEON BROWN: In response to Ms Woods' second supplementary to oral question No. 6 on 9 May 2024 I showed and explained a graph that displayed the number of low residual customer advice notices issued by Transpower since 2012. The graph displayed data provided to me at the time by Transpower. I have since been made aware that the data did not reflect the full picture. Prior to 2019 low residual customer advice notices weren't listed as a separate category. Prior to 2019 only warning and grid emergency notices were issued. Transpower has since reviewed the historical data to separate out the notices that relate to low residual situations. The trend remains clear. In recent years there has been an increase in the number of low residual situations across the network. However I apologise to the House for any confusion caused by the graph I presented in the House and I am taking this first possible opportunity to correct the record. SPEAKER: Thank you.
New Zealand Bill of Rights (Right to Sustainable Environment) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the New Zealand Bill of Rights (Right to Sustainable Environment) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 55New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 6.Noes 68New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.Motion not agreed to.
Wednesday 10 April 2024 - Volume 775
Williams ArenaARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Madam Speaker thank you for the opportunity to take a call on this important bill. This is a bill that the National Party MPs have in speech after speech said that they generally agree with. They have spoken about how the member bringing this bill the Hon James Shaw has made an incredible contribution to not only this Parliament's understanding of climate change but public life in New Zealand. The member who has brought this bill has advanced not only New Zealand's public conversation about the environment and about our rights and interests in climate change and the things that we owe to Papatūānuku and our environmental commitments as people on this planet but he has also moved the conversation along for the entire world.It is a stain on the record of this Parliament that we are not sending it to select committee. All of the members of this House should be able to see that this is something worthy of debate that this is something worthy of cross-partisan discussion that this is something worthy of us coming together as a Parliament and putting aside our political interests for the rights and interests of generations to follow us. Whether or not you support a rights-based framework; whether or not you think the regulation is the way that we should deal with climate change issues and issues in the environmental regulatory space; whether you think that the free market will just sort it out and some dream of techno-futurism is going to fix it in a moon-shot kind of way this is something that we should be having a discussion about. This is something the young people's strike on Friday afternoon School Strike 4 Climate was about. This is something that teenagers that young people at universities that young people all over Aotearoa expect leadership from at a parliamentary level.I'm proud to be able to speak in support of this bill but I want to get into the detail of this at select committee. I wish the parliamentarians around the House were allowing that opportunity to occur. Yes my colleague the Hon David Parker is right that it is good for this Parliament to be able to come together and to be able to debate this bill at this point. It is useful for us to be able to acknowledge that the kind of contribution that one member can make to advance this conversation is important—and that's why we should have this debating time with him here in the Chamber.But the kind of contribution that one member can make is vastly outstripped by a number of MPs getting their heads together in a select committee room and being able to have this conversation with not only the expert advice that is afforded to select committees but also available through the advice from the Ministry for the Environment and the useful work that has been done out there in the community on this issue.I wish we could have this conversation. I'm so disappointed in the parties that are not voting for it and I urge them to change their minds.
Te Pire Whakatupua mō Te Kāhui Tupua/Taranaki Maunga Collective Redress Bill — First Reading
Trask LauraLAURA TRASK (ACT): Kia ora. Firstly I'd like to acknowledge the eight iwi that make up Ngā Iwi o Taranaki hapū whānau and negotiators present today. I stand in support of this bill. ACT supports historical Treaty settlements and has traditionally supported the personhood of historical and culturally significant bodies such as Te Awa Tupua—the Whanganui River. This bill ensures the finalised settlement.I want to acknowledge the spiritual cultural and historical significance of Te Kāhui Tupua—Taranaki maunga—to Ngā Iwi o Taranaki as a taonga to be treasured and protected. I acknowledge the horrendous injustices when in 1865 the Crown unfairly punished Māori by confiscating 1.2 million acres of Taranaki land including Taranaki maunga. The Crown further acknowledges the challenges that the Taranaki Māori Trust Board faced in the 1970s when it attempted to negotiate the return of Taranaki maunga Māori representation on the Egmont National Park Board and the restoration of the name Taranaki" to the maunga. The Crown acknowledges a breach in Te Tiriti o Waitangi the immense long-lasting impact of land confiscation and the displacement of Ngā Iwi o Taranaki.This bill will provide an outline for the legal personhood of Te Kāhui Tupua—Taranaki maunga. In doing so this will acknowledge the injustices land confiscations and other historical wrongs suffered by Ngā Iwi o Taranaki.The Crown's continued commitment is to working together with Ngā Iwi o Taranaki in partnership to enhance the health and wellbeing of the legal person of Te Kāhui Tupua. Te Tōpuni Kōkōrangi will function as a statutory body with the purpose of being the human face and voice of Te Kāhui Tupua consisting of four members appointed by Te Tōpuni Ngārahu the collective governance entry for Ngā Iwi o Taranaki for any matters pertaining to the collective redress and arrangements and four members appointed by the Department of Conservation. These maunga have existed as ancestors guides and central pillars to the iwi hapū and whānau of Taranaki maunga.This bill acknowledges the harm and injustices against Ngā Iwi o Taranaki protects Te Kāhui Tupua and fosters a positive future relationship between the Crown and iwi. I commend this bill to the House. Kia ora."
Abel SteveSTEVE ABEL (Green): Kia ora. We'd rather have five more minutes of you than five minutes of me. Kia ora. Ngā mihi ngā uri o Taranaki.[Thank you. Greetings the descendants of Taranaki.]It was a profound honour for me to stand for my first time in this House for a Treaty settlement and for it to be Taranaki iwi. The pōwhiri today—thank you for the power of that and the power of your words.The delay the delay; the patience the patience. It blows my mind when I think about the infinite patience of you in this settlement. Taranaki Maunga Taranaki Tangata" as your whakataukī says. Justice delayed is justice denied and if there is not justice for Māori in this land there can be no legitimate place for tauiwi. I speak as tangata Tiriti and I speak to say that we must have justice for Māori because none of us can be content here. When we reflect on Taranaki no one with a heart cannot feel the bitterness of the history of what has befallen the people of Taranaki. We reflect on the raupatu the force the violence by which lands were taken by hook or by crook. It is a terrible injustice. There can never be too many acts to correct that injustice. To paraphrase Matua Ruakere Hond when we visited him at Parihaka he said "The winds of war still blow through our minds and through the generations." and to recall Dayle Takatimu at the constitutional conference just this weekend she said "It is the indigenous people of this land who have kept the peace." I salute you Taranaki for you have kept the peace in the face of unimaginable horror.It is right that your maunga be recognised for its personhood. The desecration of nature is another pathology of colonisation and part of that desecration requires that we depersonalise nature that we cease to see it as the source of all life and that we cease to recognise it as the thing from which all of us originate. So for me my deep hope in this bill is that in recognition of the personhood of the maunga we begin the reorienting of the world view towards a recognition of what has been understood across traditional cultures across the world in pre-Christian times—that nature is divinity nature is the God and is the cause—and so this is what we hope can begin to be done. The desecration of nature is still an ever-present issue in Taranaki. The first oil well was drilled on confiscated land in the 1860s in Taranaki. The fracking and the mining and the drilling and the proposed reopening of seabed mining and of offshore oil and gas drilling by this Government—these are continuations of that desecration of nature that goes against what is in the best interests of the people and it is certainly what has caused the most harm long term to tangata whenua Māori. We will continue to stand for that honouring of the integrity of indigenous place in this land and we will continue to stand in support of those reparations and those corrections and that upholding of Te Ao Māori and its deep wisdom in its relationship with nature with the maunga of Taranaki. As Te Pāti Kākāriki we commend this bill to the House. Kia ora."
Brownlee GerryURGENT DEBATES DECLINEDTVNZ—Loss of jobs and removing of showsSPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon Willie Jackson seeking to debate under Standing Order 399 the loss of jobs and removing of shows at TVNZ. Standing Order 399(1) requires that an application be delivered at least one hour before the time fixed for the House to sit". The Speaker may allow for a lesser notice period if the matter for debate occurs after that time. In this case the news of the event at TVNZ was reported before 1 p.m. and the application was received at 1.10 p.m. In addition to the application being late I do not believe that the programming or staffing decisions of this nature warrant setting aside the business of the House. The application is declined."
Restoring Citizenship Removed by Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill — First Reading
VoteASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): I'm going to put the question again. The question is that the motion be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 74New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8; Te Pāti Māori 6.Noes 49New Zealand National 49.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): The question is That the Restoring Citizenship Removed by Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill be considered by the Governance and Administration Committee.Bill referred to the Governance and Administration Committee.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): Members the House is suspended until 7:30 p.m.Sitting suspended from 6.03 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Rutherford TomTOM RUTHERFORD (National—Bay of Plenty): Thank you Madam Speaker. Firstly I want to acknowledge the contributions that have been given on this debate so far from across the House. The first contribution given—and congratulations to the member for having his bill drawn from the biscuit tin. It is a tough feat to get one drawn so congratulations and well done.Listening to the debate this evening from across the House has been engaging. It's been challenging on a personal level. It's been thought provoking. It's created an environment where people have felt safe to make their contributions to why they believe they should support or oppose the bill that is in front of us.So I want to acknowledge firstly the bill being drawn and having it here debated today. I also quickly want to acknowledge those in the community that have joined us this evening. For many first time ever coming to Parliament and experiencing the halls of power in New Zealand welcome welcome. We stand here to represent and work on behalf of you. We may not always get things right we may not always achieve what we want to deliver on but I want to acknowledge you being here and your presence. Thank you for making that effort to be here.My colleague Cameron Brewer really outlined our party's position on this bill in his excellent 10-minute contribution. But I do want to acknowledge what is glaringly obvious that the bill has the support of the wider House. And so if the bill comes to the Governance and Administration Committee—I'm not sure yet which select committee the member is intending to nominate. If it does come to that select committee though—he's nodding he's telling me yes; good man—then I look forward to the further discussions we're going to have on the bill.I look forward to understanding the perspectives that we're going to be hearing on that select committee and the real-world implications that this bill may be having for people. And I appreciate the opportunity that those people will have at the select committee with the wider support that has been given across this House. Thank you very much Madam Speaker.
VoteA personal vote was called for on the question That the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Cellar Door Tasting) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 101Abel Foster Meager Smith Anderson (P)Garcia Menéndez March (P)Stanford (P)Arbuckle Genter (P)Mitchell (P)Stephenson Bates (P)Goldsmith (P)Mooney (P)Swarbrick (P)Bayly (P)Grigg (P)Nakhle Tana (P)Bidois (P)Halbert (P)Nimon Tangaere-Manuel (P)Bishop (P)Hamilton O'Connor GTrask (P)Boyack Henare O'Connor DTuiono (P)Brewer Hernandez (P)Parker (P)Uffindell (P)Brooking Hipkins (P)Parmar (P)Unkovich Brown (P)Hoggard Patterson Upston (P)Brownlee (P)Jones Paul (P)Utikere Butterick Kirkpatrick Penk (P)van de Molen (P)Cameron (P)Kuriger Peters (P)van Velden (P)Campbell Lee Pham (P)Wade-Brown (P)Carter (P)Lu Potaka Watts (P)Cheung Luxon (P)Pugh (P)Wedd Chhour Luxton CRadhakrishnan (P)Weenink Collins (P)Luxton J (P)Redmayne (P)White Costello (P)Lyndon (P)Reti (P)Willis N (P)Costley (P)MacLeod (P)Rurawhe (P)Willis S (P)Court Marcroft Russell (P)Woods (P)Davidson M (P)McAnultyRutherford Xu-Nan (P)Doocey McCallum Seymour (P)Edmonds (P)McClay (P)Simmonds (P)Fleming (P)McKee Simpson Noes 21Andersen (P)Kapa-Kingi (P)Prime (P)Waititi (P)Belich (P)Kemp (P)Salesa Webb Bennett (P)Leary Sepuloni Williams Davidson RMaipi-Clarke Sosene (P)Ferris (P)McLellan Tinetti (P)Jackson Ngarewa-Packer Twyford (P)Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Members the House is adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow.The House adjourned at 10.06 p.m.
Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Cellar Door Tasting) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
Garcia PauloPAULO GARCIA (National—New Lynn): The wine industry is in export over $2 billion of earnings to our New Zealand economy. In the local market it is in excess of $1 billion already. It's all about the experience. What this—what Mr—what our author—Hon Members: Saint Stuart!PAULO GARCIA: —MP Stuart Smith. Ha ha!Hon Member: The honourable member for Kaikōura. PAULO GARCIA: Yes the honourable member from Kaikōura has brought to us is the opportunity to view the wine industry with a better understanding of the innovation and how it operates and why it is at the level that it is as a large driver of income for the country. Not only that the experience of the cellar door is already a large tourism pull. What the bill seeks to be able to address is to make it easier for cellar door operators to get through what used to be quite a hurdle of red tape in terms of licensing their cellar door and their cellar restaurants.So essentially because of this bill what will happen is that cellar door operators can offer wine tasting at their cellar door and charge a price for the samples that they are providing. Again it's all about the experience. It's a big big piece of the puzzle that New Zealand is and it is an attraction to overseas nationals. I myself have brought family and friends and visitors and clients through wine-tasting tours to experience the cellar door. It is indeed uniquely an amazing experience. It extends a part of what New Zealand is to a visitor or someone who has not experienced a wine tour going through say for example in Marlborough where the wineries are so close together.Catherine Wedd: And Hawke's BayPAULO GARCIA: And Hawke's Bay of course and Wairarapa as well and Gisborne.So the experience of going from cellar door to cellar door will be facilitated. What that does is open up more awareness about the products of the wine that is offered by these wineries. It opens up the opportunity for people to be able to taste and choose with greater ease the types of wines that they would like to purchase. So we're all very intent on facilitating an increased revenue in this industry and allowing for cellar door and the wineries that operate them to be able to expand their market and attract more people who come through and taste their wines.It has been mentioned that the pour is important—it's 35 millilitres. It is important because it offers a taste with the object of possibly offering many different products to people. I know that the people that I've brought through wine-tasting tours have been appreciative of the fact that they could go through tasting before they actually purchased the bottles that they enjoyed the most—the products that they enjoyed the most.It is a worthwhile bill. The honourable member from Kaikōura has done well and he knows the industry well and we commend this bill to the House.
Davidson ReubenREUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour—Christchurch East): I rise to speak on this bill the cellar door bill and I rise to speak against it and I'll tell you why. I'm speaking against it because I think it's an inaccurate bill and I think it's inaccurate because I think that the word cellar" should be spelt with an "s" not a "c" in the context of this bill—Hon Matt Doocey: He's not selling doors.REUBEN DAVIDSON: —perhaps you should—because there is no distinction here. There is absolutely no distinction because there's no need to be a cellar with a "c" because all you are being through this bill is a seller with an "s". There's no geographical proximity to the origin. The definition of a cellar door with a "c" is that manufacturers and producers offer alcohol for sale from their premises. The clue is there: "manufacturers and producers". That's why there's the "c" in cellar not simply the "s" not simply someone who sells alcohol.This bill does not address that sufficiently and there's been much talk from the other side of the House about the size of the glass but there hasn't been much talk about the number of glasses. So does the bill explicitly prevent an operator a seller with an "s" putting a bottle on the table setting out some 35 millilitre glasses and advising people that they can taste the wine? It doesn't sound much like a cellar door experience to me.So because of those reasons and because I don't think that we should take it as lightly as some other members of the House are this evening I don't think we should take our responsibility lightly around minimising alcohol harm and taking very seriously anything we do to roll back legislation that is put there to protect communities and to manage the responsible consumption of alcohol—I think we need to be far more cautious and we need to have much better legislation than this before we move forward with it. So that's why I'm voting no why I'm voting against cellar with a "c" when it should be seller with an "s"."