edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Hayes Joanne: Wellington Town Belt Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Wellington Town Belt Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9838. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): I stand to take a short call on the Wellington Town Belt Bill sponsored by the member Grant Robertson.“Tumutumu parea rākau parea whānui te ara ki a Tāne” a whakataukī by Te Wharepōuri Te Kakapi-o-Te-Rangi a man who had foresight. The whakataukī says: “Ward off post and weapons”. He had foresight when he saw those colonial ships come into Wellington Harbour and he thought: “Down with the weapons here comes some opportunity for us the iwi of Pōneke.” He also saw that on those ships would be a number of colonial settlers and he thought this was an opportunity for Māori in the Wellington Harbour.The New Zealand Company was formed in 1839 in London. Its job was to help people from England I suppose to come and settle here. Around about that time the iwi groups had a take raupatu of all the lands within the Wellington Harbour. They were Te Atiawa at Te Whanga-nui-a-Tara and parts of the south-west coast Taranaki and Ngāti Ruanui at Te Aro Ngāti Tama at Kaiwharawhara and its environs and parts of the south-west coast and Ngāti Toa Rangatira at parts of the south-west coast as well. We have heard from the member Grant Robertson that these matters to do with Treaty of Waitangi claims are well in hand and it is very pleasing to hear that.As members in the House have already said in their contributions this bill has been amended to replace clause 23 to clarify that the Public Works Act 1981 applies to the town belt. This is important for Wellington. I have lived here off and on excluding my time as a parliamentarian. I have worked here for the seafood industry and lived here. I think it is time Wellington’s development really boomed along and I think this is what this bill is going to enable Wellington to do. It is a good bill. From what I have heard from the many contributions in the House today it is one of those bills that has been a long time coming so to that end I commend the bill to the House. Kia ora.
Borrows Chester: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9829. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? It appears not.
Ross Jami-Lee: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9829. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for the House to adjourn at the end of the night at the conclusion of the members’ order of the day No. 2 or at 10 p.m. whichever is earlier.
Tisch Lindsay: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9826. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I will hear from Brett Hudson. He spoke on Part 1.
Sepuloni Carmel: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSepuloni Carmel: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9826. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CARMEL SEPULONI (Junior Whip—Labour): I move That the question be now put.
Tisch Lindsay: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9822. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): If you go for the call you get the call first because you are in the chair. You must call out louder than you did. So it is Alfred Ngaro.
Foster-Bell Paul: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9820. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): Thank you for allowing me to take this brief call and it will be a brief call because we have kicked Part 1 around the Committee quite significantly. There is a particular word in clause 4 that I want to perhaps bring into the debate and add some clarity to because for those of us from different religious traditions from the Church of Christ it is a loaded word. It is a significant word to us. We have here in this Chamber members of the Roman Catholic tradition. Some of my ancestors were Catholics and the word “dissolve”—“dissolution”—is a loaded word.I am talking about clause 4(b). The first words in clause 4(b) are “dissolve the old board”. I just think it needs to be clarified that we are not carrying out a dissolution in the sense of Henry VIII dissolving the monasteries. We are not talking about assets being broken up and carried off. We are not talking about gargoyles being removed statuary being taken down or walls and windows being misappropriated. We are not talking about beautiful artwork being painted over. When we are talking about dissolving the old board we are actually meaning that we are making it a legal nullity although its assets its property its moneys its powers and its obligations are transferred over to the new board.I think this is an important point because for those of us from different traditions—my own family are a mixture of Anglicans Catholics Presbyterians and Open Brethren actually—the word “dissolve” will mean different things to all of us. You know the word “dissolve” is quite loaded and we are talking about simply a legal dissolution so that those existing properties interests powers and obligations are dissolved in the old board and are transferred through to the new board under the new name the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board rather than the Churches of Christ—Dr David Clark: This speech is dissolving into the ridiculous.PAUL FOSTER-BELL: Well I would be interested in hearing a call from the minister of religion on the other side of the Chamber Dr David Clark. I know that this is not the tradition that he comes from. This is a very different tradition because this is a laity-based ministry rather than ordained ministers conducting services in their church halls. I appreciate that Dr Clark may have a different set of experiences that he wants to bring in when he is reflecting on the wording of Part 1 of the bill and I would be interested in hearing from him. I just thought it was important to rise and to take a brief call around that particularly loaded word at the start of clause 4(b).Part 1 agreed to.
Clark David: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9820. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): I move That the question be now put.
Tisch Lindsay: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9815. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I want to say that this is a very narrow bill. I have it in front of me. It is not a wide-ranging debate and I will ask members in future calls—we are on clauses 3 and 4—to just concentrate specifically on clauses 3 and 4 otherwise I will terminate the speeches.
Pugh Maureen: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePugh Maureen: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9798. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.MAUREEN PUGH (National) to the Minister for Small Business: How are small businesses benefiting from Government policies that are contributing to lower interest rates?Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister for Small Business): Small businesses continue to benefit from the Government’s policies of prudent and stable fiscal management which contribute to low inflation and low interest rates. Many small-business owners mortgage or borrow against their family home to create grow and fund working capital for their businesses. Current low interest rates and mortgage rates of under 5 percent make it easier for those small-business owners to operate grow and create jobs for Kiwis. Interest rates have not been this low since records began in 1964. This is in stark contrast to just 8 years ago when those interest rates started at 10 percent.Maureen Pugh: How are Government policies contributing to certainty for small businesses?Hon CRAIG FOSS: This Government has pursued stable macroeconomic policy that has contributed to low inflation and low interest rates. This is contributing to ongoing confidence and certainty for small businesses. What small businesses do not need are policies where the Government is meddling tinkering tampering and putting macroeconomic settings at risk. Policies such as controlling interest rates—who knows what could be next? Carless days controlling the exchange rate wage and price freezes? What other policies from the 1970s—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard enough of the answer.Maureen Pugh: What other policies have contributed to small-business growth?Hon CRAIG FOSS: There are a number of policies from this Government that have contributed and continue to contribute to small-business growth including reducing company and personal tax rates introducing the 90-day trial to make it easier for small businesses to employ and for many to gain employment continuing to pursue and sign free-trade agreements and adhering to such agreements. These are just some of the policies of this Government that have helped small businesses across New Zealand. It is unfortunate that the Opposition has opposed all of these policies.
Doocey Matt: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDoocey Matt: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9795. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.MATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri) to the Minister for Social Development: How is low inflation supporting a real increase in superannuation?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): Thanks to the strong financial management of this Government superannuation has increased by over 34 percent since 2008 which is double the rate of inflation of 15.5 percent in that same time. As this Government has committed to keeping superannuation and veterans pension rates at 66 percent of average income both rates will increase by 2.73 percent on 1 April. This means that in addition to lower living costs our superannuitants are better off with an extra $15.74 a week for a married couple $10.23 a week for a single person living alone and $9.44 for a single person sharing accommodation.Matt Doocey: In addition to superannuation what other supports are set to increase on 1 April?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: On 1 April changes introduced as part of the child hardship package will come into effect. That means benefit rates for families with children will rise by $25 a week after tax—the first real increase in 43 years. Given the falling cost of living this is a significant increase for these families on a benefit. Working for Families rates will also increase by $12.50 for low-income working families and $24.50 for very low-income working families. The child hardship package reaches over half a million children and will help ease the depth of hardship experienced by families in New Zealand’s lowest-income households.David Seymour: How long after the current Prime Minister’s retirement will the Government raise the age of entitlement to New Zealand superannuation?Mr SPEAKER: No. Oh I will let the Minister address it. It is a marginal question I have to accept.Hon ANNE TOLLEY: That is so far in the future I could not even contemplate it.Carmel Sepuloni: How many applications for superannuation were unable to be processed in the last 2 weeks due to the issues of the client management IT system and is the new system still struggling to process these applications?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I am not aware that there were—I do not have any figures on how many superannuation applications were delayed but what I can say to the House is that the system by Friday was at a hundred percent capacity which is fantastic—Chris Hipkins: That’s not true!Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I beg your pardon. It is true they are at hundred percent capacity and they are catching up on the backlog and they are to be congratulated on implementing a very complex system in a very short period of time.Carmel Sepuloni: Not true.Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Shaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9788. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]2.JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.James Shaw: Does he stand by his statement made in the House yesterday that Government irrigation schemes are helping farmers to stay viable?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: When there are droughts yes.James Shaw: Does he accept that many farmers are heavily in debt right now because they are having to pay for expensive irrigation schemes?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Primarily no. That will not be the thing that is driving up their debt. In the case of dairy farmers it is a lower payout and in some cases it could be because they have done substantial conversions. Irrigation affects some farmers but for the vast bulk of them the bulk of their debt on the farm will not be for that reason.James Shaw: Is it wise that the Government continues to subsidise irrigation for further dairy intensification at a time when milk prices are at record lows?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: It may come as a shock to the member but the water will not be used just by dairy farmers. It will be used by a great range of different farmers and horticulturalists—for everything from apples to kiwifruit to wine. So actually yes irrigation is a positive thing and I go back to the point I made earlier: rather than people coming to the House with crocodile tears they should come to the House with practical solutions to help our rural sector. That does actually include irrigation schemes which helps them.James Shaw: Should irrigation schemes not stand or fall on their own merits rather than require Government subsidies?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: If I remember question time yesterday the member was telling me we were not doing enough for farmers. Today he is telling me we are doing too much for them.James Shaw: What Government subsidies currently exist for other industries such as tourism that rival the $400 million he has set aside for Crown Irrigation Investments?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Every single year the Government puts in well in excess of $100 million to pay for the promotion of New Zealand in the form of tourism advertising. We do not do that for any other sector other than tourism.James Shaw: Will he consider putting the $280 million remaining in Crown Irrigation Investments to better use than massive irrigation projects which are putting some farmers in debt degrading the environment and risking tourism?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No the basis of the irrigation schemes—where the Government would be a shareholder but looking to exit those schemes over time when more and more farmers join them—is actually to give those farmers greater production and greater yield and greater comfort and assurance when the weather conditions do not otherwise support that. If we want to have a dairy and by the way agricultural sector that is robust enough to handle conditions some of which will be drought then actually they need better access to water.
Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSittings of the House[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9829. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Sittings of the HouseJAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for the House to adjourn at the end of the night at the conclusion of the members’ order of the day No. 2 or at 10 p.m. whichever is earlier.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? It appears not.
Naylor Jono: Rangitāne o Manawatu Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Rangitāne o Manawatu Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9779. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONO NAYLOR (National): Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawa. He mihi ki a koutou ki a Rangitāne o Manawatū nau mai haere mai ki Te Whare Pāremata. He pai te rā mō Rangitāne o Manawatū mō te rohe o Manawatū he pai te rā nei mō Aotearoa New Zealand.[Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I acknowledge you Rangitāne of Manawatū; welcome come hither to Parliament House. It is a good day for Rangitāne of Manawatū the region of Manawatū and New Zealand today.]This is a great day for Rangitāne o Manawatu this is a great day for the region of the Manawatū and it is a great day for New Zealand.My journey with Rangitāne in particular around the Treaty settlement started I guess when I was elected to the Palmerston North City Council in 2001. Since that time I feel like every time I speak to someone from Rangitāne I am like the little kid who sits in the back of the car on their way to a holiday and says: “Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?”. Well today: “Irā titiro ki te moana!”—Look I can see the sea! We are almost there. This journey is coming to its conclusion and this is just the first stage in this House.I acknowledge that today our time is restricted and I only hope that I can make more of a contribution in further readings but today I commend this bill to the House and I say congratulations to all from Rangitāne o Manawatu. I look forward to the progress of this bill and I commend the bill to the House.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Taranaki Iwi Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFlavell Te Ururoa: Taranaki Iwi Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9770. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TE URUROA FLAVELL (Co-Leader—Māori Party):Tēnā koeMr Assistant Speaker kia ora tātau ngā taokete o Taranaki tēnā koutou e Rangitāne kua tae mai i te rā nei. Kaua e pāpōuri mai e kore au e noho mō te roanga o te kōrero e pā ana ki a koutou ēngari i tēnei wā kua hāngai tonu taku titiro ki ngā taokete o Taranaki Maunga.
Kuriger Barbara: Taranaki Iwi Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKuriger Barbara: Taranaki Iwi Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9767. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): It is a humbling pleasure to take a very brief call on this bill today. This has a special place in my heart as someone who was also born in Taranaki grew up in Ōpunake very close to Parihaka and went to school with a number of your people. It is my pleasure today to commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Mallard Trevor: Taranaki Iwi Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Taranaki Iwi Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9766. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Before I call the next member mainly through some of my own slackness in applying the bell we are running slightly behind time and have another bill yet to come up before us. I think it would be exceptionally rude to the people who have travelled here if we did not finish that bill and therefore I am seeking leave that this extended sitting be adjourned at the completion of order of the day No. 11 notwithstanding it may be after 1 p.m. Is there any objection to that? There appears to be no objection.
Reti Shane: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeReti Shane: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9753. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): Tēnā koe Mr Deputy Speaker. It is a pleasure to speak in the final call on the Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill. E rau rangatira mā ngā mihi ki a koutou i tēnei rā mō tēnei mahi hirahira. Nau mau haere mai.[Esteemed ones of a hundredfold acknowledgments to you on this day in regard to this magnificent accomplishment. Welcome welcome.]I wanted just very briefly to speak to some of the introductory sentences at key parts of this bill because what is said is enlightening but what is written is binding. So I think it is important to cover some of these points. There are five key points to this bill.Let me start with the acknowledgment. The opening sentence to the acknowledgment states: “The Crown acknowledges that despite previous efforts made in the twentieth century it has failed to deal in an appropriate way with the grievances of Te Atiawa and that the recognition of these grievances is long overdue. The Crown hereby recognises the legitimacy of the historical grievances of Te Atiawa”. It then concludes the acknowledgment with the statement “The Crown acknowledges that its breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi and its principles during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries have together significantly undermined the traditional systems of authority and economic capacity of Te Atiawa and the physical cultural and spiritual well-being of its people. The Crown acknowledges that it has failed to protect the rangatiratanga of Te Atiawa in breach of its obligations under Article Two of the Treaty of Waitangi.”There are several key parts here. The apology follows. Part 1 clause 15 talks about the settlement being final. The cultural redress follows in Part 2 clauses 26 and 27: cultural redress under conservation protocols fishery protocols and taonga tūturu which is further defined under the Protected Objects Act. That is kind of interesting because as defined in that Act taonga tūturu relates to an object that relates to Māori culture history or society and that was or appears to have been manufactured or modified in New Zealand by Māori or brought into New Zealand by Māori or used by Māori and is more than 50 years old. That is encompassed under the cultural redress. The final part is the commercial redress which talks about the ability of the Crown to transfer properties. The Minister of Conservation may grant easement and the right of first refusal on right of first refusal land—that is a very short summary.Negotiations began decades ago on this settlement and many who have worked on this are not here today. Many have taken that long last walk to our heavenly father and they are advancing the prosperity of their people their values and their traditions. So we give them thanks and we commend their bill to this House today. Thank you.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Māori Affairs Committee.Waiata
Borrows Chester: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9747. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A 5-minute call—the Hon Nanaia Mahuta.
Hayes Joanne: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9746. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): Tēnā koe Mr Deputy Speaker. Ā tēnā koe ka nui te mihi atu ki a koutou te whānau whānui o Te Atiawa. Nau mai haere mai ki Te Whare i tēnei rā.[And thank you Mr Deputy Speaker.A huge acknowledgment to you the extensive family of Te Atiawa. Welcome welcome to the House today.]I am pleased to stand to take a call and it is going to be a very brief call because I believe that every minute spoken here on the first reading is a minute longer that you have to wait for your bill to get through the House and through Royal assent so I will keep it quite brief.I just want to pay respect to Wikitōria Keenan for the hard work and the diligence and that “No I’m not going to move.” attitude that she had as a negotiator for Te Atiawa. To not bow down to taking anything less than $87 million for the financial and commercial redress and nearly a million dollars for cultural redress was something that Te Atiawa can be very very proud of so I want to pay her respect as well as Peter Moeahu.Many of my colleagues in the House have given a wonderful historical account of the atrocities that Te Atiawa have faced to get to this point today. As many in the House have said not all the money in the world can resolve or pay you back for the atrocities that you suffered. The conclusion of this piece of legislation as described by a reporter from the Taranaki Daily News will see you as “an economic powerhouse a mega landlord”. And that is just the start because soon very soon you will return to the most amazing economic past that you came from as described by Wīremu Kīngi Te Rangitake. It was described in the history about the plantations the crops and the European-style trading ships from outside that Te Atiawa once enjoyed as an iwi. Although you might not get all the way there it is a start. It is more than zero; it is a start. I commend the bill to the House.
Kuriger Barbara: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKuriger Barbara: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9741. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): This morning I would like to welcome Te Atiawa to our House. I have got my special little card this morning that was given to us at the signing of the document on 5 September and on here there is a very special meaningful quote which is “Tūngia te ururoa kia tupu whakaritorito te tupu o te harakeke.”—clear away the encumbrances so that the new growth of the harakeke can flourish.I am speaking in this House—having come very late to the piece as a new member of Parliament—when we are looking at redressing things that have happened many many years ago. But it is a real honour and a pleasure to be standing here today and speaking to you.My colleague Nuk Korako said before as part of his speech that in those days the Crown really took advantage of disagreements between iwi in Taranaki. It is a real pleasure today also to hold this special taonga which commemorates the historical milestone of the Taranaki iwi signing the Taranaki iwi deed of settlement at Puke Te Whiti on Saturday 5 September 2015. This is something I hold dear to me as we have this discussion.What I find is the most important thing about this is that there is no redress in terms of dollar amounts that will ever help the things that happened in the past. It was absolutely abhorrent; it was absolutely unnecessary. I think the most important thing in doing this settlement is really around making sure that the cultural redress is made. The apologies have been done. It was a real honour to be with Minister Finlayson on the day and I really do want to acknowledge the generosity of Te Atiawa in working through this settlement.I am not on the Māori Affairs Committee but I really look forward to your submissions coming through. I really look forward to taking an intense interest in this process as we work through this piece of legislation. Something that I am really pleased about is that being a Taranaki MP I am able to attend events and hui where we talk a lot about your vision and dreams. I know I cannot make right of the past but what I can do is help in any way that I possibly can with our Government in terms of helping you achieve your visions and dreams for the future.I look forward to the Ngā Motu Marae going up. I live not very far from Paritūtū and I really look forward to working with you going forward. What I wanted to say at this time is “Nāu te raurau nāku te raurau ka ora te iwi.”—with your contribution and my contribution we will prosper. So thank you for the opportunity this morning.
Mallard Trevor: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9741. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Before I call the next member I am just going to make a slight request to members who are speaking. In a Treaty settlement bill I am reluctant to use the bell. It is important stuff and I do not want to cut people off mid-flow. But if members on both sides of the House just keep an eye on me I will give them a signal when they have roughly used their time up.
Tisch Lindsay: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9732. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. The time has come for me to leave the Chair.Debate interrupted.
Hudson Brett: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9731. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRETT HUDSON (National): It is with pleasure I rise to support the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill. For the benefit of the member Denis O’Rourke who has just taken his seat I say that the bill is very carefully and clearly pitched at being a small remedial bill to address a couple of issues that arose and that had not been considered in the last set of reforms. It is not intended to be a major reform or review of the sale and supply of alcohol. So it is no great surprise then that it does just what it says it is going to do and if Mr O’Rourke cannot quite fathom that then I am afraid he is beyond our help. For the benefit of another member who spoke a little before and who said that he felt that this was going through a long process in order to achieve some small things—well I have some advice or some suggestions for Mr Faafoi too. If he thinks that it is a long and involved process to make a couple of small changes he could help by just taking much shorter calls. The quality of content would be the same and the time would be much less.This bill will simply address a couple of unforeseen consequences of the earlier reforms. Those earlier reforms have not actually made any negative changes around the supply of those low-alcohol beverages. It is just that unfortunately it has meant that they could not be displayed or promoted in the alcohol section of the establishment—say the supermarket—where the law demands that the other alcoholic beverages must be sold.For instance at the moment if an organisation really wanted to it could place the mead or the low-alcohol wine along with the vegetables. I for one do not normally make an association between a mead and a swede—a swede and a mead I see no need—and I do think that it is absolutely right that those low-alcohol beverages should in fact be restricted to the same area of the supermarket or liquor store as the other alcoholic beverages. I think it is a very sensible move to tighten it up in that sense.But I will remind the House that although there were some unintended consequences of the earlier reforms they have not led to those beverages being more accessible but just perhaps to them being displayed in the wrong area. I look forward to the passage of this bill through the House and to the much shorter calls from Mr Faafoi and his colleagues—and that way it will be wrapped up a lot sooner. I commend this bill to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9723. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Sorry to interrupt the honourable member. Her time has expired.
Pugh Maureen: Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePugh Maureen: Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9720. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MAUREEN PUGH (National): It is a pleasure to stand and take this short call in support of this bill. This Government continues to focus on four priorities one of which is delivering Better Public Services. The Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Bill fits well within that priority. As we have already heard tonight the health budget has grown to a record level of just under $16 billion under this Government. With that core services such as treatment for alcohol and drug addiction continue to receive Government support.This is a sensible bill; it modernises the legislation to reflect the support we offer to New Zealanders who struggle with drug and alcohol addiction. Most people who abuse alcohol or other drugs do not need compulsory treatment; however some people are just so unwell that they are not able to make that decision for themselves. I have confidence that families who have struggled with loved ones suffering from severe alcohol and drug addiction will support this piece of legislation as do I. I commend this bill to the House.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Health Committee.
Borrows Chester: Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9715. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Hon Ruth Dyson—a 5-minute call on behalf of the Labour Party.
Borrows Chester: Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9714. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: David Clendon—a 5-minute call on behalf of the Green Party.
Bishop Chris: Land Transfer Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBishop Chris: Land Transfer Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9699. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS BISHOP (National): It is a pleasure to take a call on this bill. I just want to contrast two of the speeches we heard in the debate on the bill. The two speeches I want to contrast are David Cunliffe’s and David Parker’s. Mr Cunliffe’s speech was quite an extraordinary contribution to the debate on this bill and it actually continues a long line of his speeches on a lot of bills that come before the House which is to really put on the old tinfoil hat and see conspiracy theories when they are not there. Somehow on this very technical—very important but very technical—piece of legislation he seemed to imagine all sorts of theories about foreign investment and about the dairy industry.Then we had David Parker’s speech which was a sober and serious and important contribution to the debate particularly the front half—I did not necessarily agree with the back half of the speech but it was a pretty good speech. I just want to say to the House that that was an interesting contrast.I was not at university someone who enjoyed property law. I have got to say at Victoria University across the road I enjoyed the lectures by Professor Richard Boast. I enjoyed learning about the history of the Torrens title system—and we heard a lovely exposition from the New Zealand First member Denis O’Rourke earlier who I did not know was a lawyer actually but that was an interesting thing for the House. We heard a very interesting exposition from Mr O’Rourke about the history of the Torrens title system and it is fascinating.I particularly enjoyed the lectures from Professor Boast on some of the history of Māori land law and we have just heard from the Hon Nanaia Mahuta about some of the past wrongs and some of the implications for Māori under this Act. Very very interesting—but I was not someone who was particularly interested in the technicalities of property law the indefeasibility and the way in which the Torrens title system works.But I think that the take-home point from those lectures—and this is my final point—is that the land transfer system we have in New Zealand is world class it is world leading and it is extremely important. Not a day would go by when thousands of New Zealanders around the country would not use the Land Transfer Act and the systems contained within it that have been built up over time. It is extremely important—and this point has been made by a number of speakers—to the operation of our functioning market economy based on property rights and it is absolutely very important that we get it right.I do not think I will be on the select committee considering this bill but I know that my colleagues led by Sarah Dowie and the rest of her team will be doing a good job of considering this bill in great detail. With those brief remarks I commend this bill to the House.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Government Administration Committee.
Tisch Lindsay: Land Transfer Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Land Transfer Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9695. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The Hon David Parker—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Land Transfer Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Land Transfer Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9694. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Marama Davidson—5 minutes.
Hudson Brett: Land Transfer Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Land Transfer Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9694. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRETT HUDSON (National): It is a pleasure to rise in support of the Land Transfer Bill. I see the member for New Lynn David Cunliffe over there. I just want to reassure him. He has been in this House I believe for about 17 years—since 1999—and the good folk of New Lynn might be somewhat surprised today to see that despite those many years of service here it appears that he could not comprehend that this particular bill does not actually amend the Overseas Investment Act and therefore has absolutely no bearing on the ease or difficulty foreign buyers have in actually buying some land. I would suggest for the benefit of that member and in fact for the benefit of his constituents that he might find that comprehension would be aided if he were to remove his tinfoil hat when reading bills.It is quite topical for me this particular bill. This is a first reading; it is going to take some time for this bill to make its way through this House. But as it so happens this Friday my partner and I will settle on two houses. We will settle a sales transaction on our current house and we will settle the purchase of a new house in Khandallah. And if I may Khandallah translates as “the resting place of God”. Let me assure you that the suburb of Khandallah is indeed a slice of paradise in Godzone. Of course you could actually use that to describe any part of the Ōhāriu electorate the very best electorate across all of the country.So this Friday we will settle on two transactions. But we are not alone because this chain as it is for many New Zealanders buying property is a chain of at least four transactions—four that we know of. Each one of those is a potential area of some uncertainty or error—we do not and would not suspect any fraud—in a law that today I think we would all agree we would describe as archaic and very complex and incredibly difficult for lay people to navigate. Therefore we would perhaps suggest there is the potential for some uncertainty in an area that is still likely to be the largest investment that most Kiwis will ever make and in terms of property rights it is something that underpins not only economic growth but also just confidence in our economy and in the rule of law in New Zealand.As I say we do not anticipate any issues in the settlement chain for us this Friday but I think by its very definition you would say that for any property settlement that goes awry particularly if it were to be due to fraud. So I am very pleased—in fact I applaud the changes we see in this bill to help to provide some greater restitution for people who might suffer a manifest injustice particularly due to the fraudulent activities of others. I commend this bill to the House. I look forward to its successful passage through the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Land Transfer Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Land Transfer Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9689. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member but his time has expired.
Smith Nick: Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Nick: Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9682. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): I move That the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill be reported to the House by 2 August 2016.Motion agreed to.
Doocey Matt: Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDoocey Matt: Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9681. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): It is a pleasure to rise in support of the first reading of the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill and taking the last call in this debate it is great to hear the support from around the House for this bill. It has thrown me a bit. Normally for me I know a bill is a good bill for New Zealanders when New Zealand First votes against it. So having those members vote for this bill has thrown me a wee bit but it is good to see—it is great to see.I am not sure I am as pessimistic as Damien O’Connor the last speaker. I think this is a day when New Zealanders can be proud. I would like to acknowledge the Rt Hon John Key our Prime Minister for his vision in announcing the sanctuary at the United Nations. I would like to acknowledge the work of Ministers Smith and Barry—Ministers for the environment and conservation respectively.It is a great day to be a New Zealander and this bill has created world attention. When you look at The Guardian in the UK it said that the sanctuary will be one of the world’s most significant fully protected ecosystems and when you look at the Wall Street Journal it described it as “bigger than Texas” and it said that we were the latest island nation in the Pacific to put ecological protection and tourism ahead of the fishing and mining industries. That is great news for New Zealand. And also the World Wide Fund for Nature New Zealand said it congratulated the Government on taking decisive action to protect this incredibly special area.The Hon Ruth Dyson put a challenge to us in the fourth speech in this debate today. She said to us: “Who is the member of Parliament for the Kermadecs?”. So as a diligent backbencher I went away and did a bit of research and I have to say—Chris Bishop: Oh who is it?MATT DOOCEY: Actually no one is the member of Parliament for the Kermadecs. But any people living on the Kermadecs—mainly Department of Conservation staff—will go back to the last electorate that they resided in as the electorate that they would vote in when on the Kermadecs.Can I just finish by saying that I once heard the statement “If space is the final frontier then the ocean is the first frontier”. Many New Zealanders love their snorkelling and their scuba-diving—possibly not in the Kermadecs. But when you go under the waves and you see the diversity of the ecosystems—basically on this side of the House you know we love highways and the Kermadecs is basically one big marine highway. If you think of all that marine life shooting its way through—what is it—620000 square kilometres that is something to be preserved.I welcome this bill and look forward to it going to the select committee. Thank you.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.
Mallard Trevor: Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9679. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The Hon David Parker—a 5-minute call.