edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Browning Steffan: Food Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrowning Steffan: Food Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STEFFAN BROWNING: Thank you Mr Chair. Part 3 is all about imported food. It is not about any domestically arranged food; it is all about imported food. Ministers can accept it or seek a review and they have done that a couple of times. The food is ultimately always accepted. It has never not been ultimately accepted. It gets gazetted in Australia then it goes to the Ministry for Primary Industries for an amendment and then it goes through and gets gazetted into New Zealand law. It gets put into the New Zealand food chain if it is available. So in Part 3 we are talking about who can actually import food how they are registered how they will comply and how they can be deregistered. Only certain people can do that. It is good that we are going to have a better overview on food that is imported but I do want to go through that process on how the decisions are made for that particular food on how that process goes.I just mentioned that New Zealanders and Australians for that matter have only one possibility. I do want to give an analogy on this. I know this is Part 3 but I need to show where that process is not fair.Tim Macindoe: Which clause is the member referring to?STEFFAN BROWNING: I will open it up again for you. I question the questioner as to what the concern is on having this spelt out. It needs to be spelt out. We have got the Food Bill in front of us.Tim Macindoe: What’s the relevant section?STEFFAN BROWNING: It is about importers. I am saying that this is a totally imported food. New Zealanders have only one opportunity to submit on this imported food. Then you ask: “Can they actually appeal it? Can they complain about it?”. The only possibility is to complain to our Regulations Review Committee to say that this should not have been imported. It should not have been approved. But the Regulations Review Committee when it has gone through a comprehensive look at it has said: “No we cannot uphold the complaint because Food Standards Australia New Zealand has ticked all the boxes.” At that point all a New Zealander an organisation or anyone can do is go to the High Court for a judicial review and yet this stuff is not fit for purpose because it has not been appraised properly or independently.Will we administer this bill—and this might be a way that the Minister can do it—by saying that these importers cannot import this food? You may feel compelled to gazette it and tick it through as suitable but I think you need to find a way of stopping it coming into the food chain. There is more on that and I will do that in Part 5 which may be the better part to finish this in. I will not be able to complete it in this section. Thank you.
Browning Steffan: Food Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrowning Steffan: Food Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STEFFAN BROWNING (Green): As I said before on the Food Bill I would like to speak on the GE food process because absolutely all genetically engineered food in New Zealand is imported. We do not grow any—and that is a very good position—and there is a need for enforcement and independent advice. First of all if an applicant generally a big agrichemical company like Monsanto Dow or Dupont wants to introduce something into the food chain here the authority is Food Standards Australia New Zealand and there are variants around that through our joint partnership arrangement. If the company wants to do that it applies to Food Standards Australia New Zealand say and then a notification is sent out after Food Standards Australia New Zealand has done an administrative assessment. It prepares what it says is a safety and nutrition assessment but I can assure you that it has very very limited information when it does that and it bases it on some very crude assumptions.Food Standards Australia New Zealand publishes that assessment report for public consultation. It includes whatever safety and other data is provided. It is fairly complex in the technicalities but very very low on the genuine safety appraisals. Then the public are invited to make submissions on that assessment. That is it. The public of New Zealand through this process get one chance of submitting on an issue that is dear to their food health and safety. There is just the one chance. The Ministry for Primary Industries makes submissions to Food Standards Australia New Zealand and it also gets what it calls an independent review by the National Institute of Environmental Science and Research on available information only. Then Food Standards Australia New Zealand considers the public submissions and puts out an approval report. That is signed off by the Food Standards Australia New Zealand board.Then it comes down to the next part the Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation. That is where our current Minister for Food Safety Nikki Kaye is as were other food safety Ministers in the past. There was another name for this part but it is now called the Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation. The forum gets an opportunity at that point to either accept or seek a review of what Food Standards Australia New Zealand has put before it. Let me just spell out that there are 10 Ministers on that forum. Our Minister our New Zealand Minister for Food Safety is one of the 10 because Australia has got various federal—Tim Macindoe: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Part 3 of this bill is a very small part and this member is not addressing his comments to any aspect of Part 3.The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Well I have the bill in front of me and I am looking at clause 122A which talks about border information. I have sought some advice but I just ask the member in his comments on Part 3 to be more succinct.
Ardern Shane: Food Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeArdern Shane: Food Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17860. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country): I moveThat the question be now put.
Tisch Lindsay: Food Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Food Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17856. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): We now move to Part 2. This is debate on clauses 19 to 96 and schedules 1 to 4.
Vote: Food Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Food Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17855. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes64New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes56New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 440 in the name of the Hon Damien O’Connor to Part 1 be agreed to.
McKelvie Ian: Food Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Food Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17855. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): I moveThat the question be now put.
Ardern Shane: Food Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeArdern Shane: Food Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17844. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country): It is a pleasure to rise and speak in the Committee stage of the Food Bill having sat through endless hours in the Primary Production Committee listening to submissions on the formation of and amendments to this bill. I think it is probably worth noting at the beginning the chronology of the bill. The bill was first introduced into the House on 26 May 2010 it had its first reading on 27 July 2010 and was reported on by the Primary Production Committee on 16 December 2010. On 2 July 2013 it was returned to the Primary Production Committee for a second round having been delayed and then revisited as a result of the whey protein concentrate scare. The select committee had a couple of substantial goes at amending the original bill and then the Supplementary Order Paper that subsequently followed as a result of that.The points that were made by the select committee are well covered in the commentary that the select committee reported back to the House and it is worthtouching on a couple of those. To the purpose of the bill we recommended adding clause 4(ba) to make it clear that one of the primary purposes of the bill is to maintain New Zealand’s reputation as a producer and exporter of safe and suitable food. I think that cuts right to the nub of what this bill is about at one end of it and that is that New Zealand is an export nation of protein-based food—and other types of food but predominantly protein-based food—which have the opportunity I guess within them to carry all sorts of potential dangers from a food safety point of view. To have a robust legislative framework around controls and Government responses to those types of risks from a reputational point of view is an essential ingredient to New Zealand’s economy—more than I think most people realise given that something like 72 to 73 percent of all export earnings from New Zealand come from our primary sector. That was a major consideration in the deliberations on this bill.At the other end of the spectrum of course you have the small fund-raising committees etc. such as Lions Rotary clubs marae school calf days those kinds of things where there was a pretty heavy-handed bureaucratic approach and so it was decided that there must be a better way. Through like I say a long process we believe that we have arrived at a point where we have achieved that. I look forward to debating various parts of this bill as it moves through the Committee.
Carter David: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: General Debate[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17836. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member’s time has expired.
Hauiti Claudette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHauiti Claudette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17829. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.CLAUDETTE HAUITI (National) to theMinister of Statistics: What reports has she received on how the 2013 Census data will help shape communities and inform decision making?Hon NICKY WAGNER (Minister of Statistics): Statistics New Zealand yesterday published2013 Census QuickStats about a place. This is an online tool that uses a combination of census data and other statistics to give people access to quality information so they can understand their neighbourhoods cities districts and regions across topics such as population incomes housing cultural diversity age and sex.Claudette Hauiti: What has census data revealed about the earthquakes’ impact on Canterbury?Hon NICKY WAGNER: The census data gives us vital information for the rebuild by providing a graphic illustration of how Christchurch and wider Canterbury havechanged. Quality information underpins good decision-making and knowing where people are now living and working allows central and local government to plan where essential services are needed.
Yang Jian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYang Jian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17828. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.Dr JIAN YANG (National) to theMinister of Health: What is the Government doing to increase awareness of prostate cancer?Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health): The Government has previously allocated $4.3 million to raise awareness for prostate cancer and to ensure that men have fair access to quality information and care. Previously advice on prostate cancer tests and management was confusing and there was a great deal of conflicting information. Consistent prostate cancer resources for patients have now been made available to every general practice and general practice team in the country and guidance training and advice tools have also been made available to general practices. This will help men their families and general practices to have a more informed discussion about prostate cancer and help health professionals to provide consistent quality prostate care.Dr Cam Calder: Why is it important to raise awareness of prostate cancer?Hon TONY RYALL: That is a very good question because over 3000 New Zealand men are diagnosed with prostate cancer every year. The Government is committed to improving outcomes for patients with cancer and ensuring that New Zealanders are properly informed about prostate cancer so that it can be detected early. Initiatives such as this will lead to improved diagnosis treatment and care.
Sharples Pita: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSharples Pita: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17824. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Māori Party—Tāmaki Makaurau) to theMinister of Energy and Resources: How many homes have been insulated as a result of the Relationship Accords signed with the Māori Party in 2008 and 2011 and of these how many were in low income households?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources): In total as a result of the relationship accords 28000 low-income homes have been insulated at a cost of more than $50 million in Government grants. In total under both the Warm Up New Zealand programmes more than 112000 low-income homes have been insulated and this number will continue to grow. I would like to thank the Māori Party for its strong support and commitment to helping those most in need live in warmer drier healthier homes.Hon Dr Pita Sharples: What geographic regions have been covered by the Warm Up New Zealand home insulation initiatives and what areas are still outstanding?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Since the Warm Up New Zealand initiatives began in 2009 all regions of the country have been covered. The Warm Up New Zealand: Healthy Homes programme coverage is dependent on third-party providers like iwi district health boards and community trusts. The first round of the programme which started in September last year has seen extremely good coverage from Northland toSouthland. There are still some areas that the healthy homes initiative is not getting to—for example the West Coast the top of the South Island and parts of the central North Island—and I encourage third-party providers to come on board in these areas in the future.Hon Dr Pita Sharples: Has the Minister conducted any evaluations of the impact of the scheme on whānau health; if so what are the findings?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Yes; an independent evaluation of the Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart programme showed that the greatest benefits from insulation are for people on low incomes and facing a higher risk of health issues. The report found that the avoided health costs to the Government from insulating a house average $850 a year for community services cardholders compared with only $335 a year for non-cardholders. This was one of the main drivers for the decision in last year’s Budget to target low-income households with high health needs under the new healthy homes scheme.
Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHeatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17824. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.Hon PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) to theMinister for Social Development: What recent announcement has the Government made about funding for sexual violence services?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development): As part of Budget 2014 I recently announced $10.4 million in new funding to support sexual violence services. Sexual violence services do a fantastic job at providing much-needed support for victims and their families and often at a time of crisis. I have listened to the sector’s call for some immediate funding to ensure victims can continue to access services and providers can remain financially viable. The extra funding includes support for front-line crisis response services community-based treatment services services for male survivors and people accessing medical and forensic services.Hon Phil Heatley: I am interested to know—how does this compare with how the sector has been supported in the past?Hon PAULA BENNETT: We know that sexual violence is a serious problem and we also think it is a basic right that people should feel safe secure and free of fear which is too often taken away from people through sexual violence. A 2006 Treasury estimate found that sexual offending costs us about $1.2 billion a year. Not only has there been significant underfunding of services for some years but funding has often been provided in a piecemeal way. By taking responsibility across portfolios for this area we are able to see a cross-agency project that identifies the gaps and we are able to put the funding where it is most needed.Hon Phil Heatley: What kind of response has the announcement drawn from the sector?Hon PAULA BENNETT: What we are hearing from providers is that this gives them the sustainability that they need to be able to provide these most necessary services over the next 2 years and this also means that we can then look at their long-term funding and identify where the gaps are. A Wellington Rape Crisis spokesperson said: “We are heartened by Minister Bennett’s announcements … and applaud the Government’s decision to focus on frontline services for survivors right now and plan for prevention to be addressed in the longer term.”
Carter David: Visitors — Kenya—Delegation Parliamentary Service CommissionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Visitors — Kenya—Delegation Parliamentary Service Commission[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17815. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have much pleasure in informing the House that a delegation from the Parliamentary Service Commission of Kenya led by the Hon Adan Keynan MP is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Visitors — Kenya—Delegation Parliamentary Service CommissionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVisitors — Kenya—Delegation Parliamentary Service Commission[Sitting date: 14 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17815. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Wednesday 14 May 2014Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.VisitorsKenya—Delegation Parliamentary Service CommissionMr SPEAKER: I have much pleasure in informing the House that a delegation from the Parliamentary Service Commission of Kenya led by the Hon Adan Keynan MP is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Vote: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17814. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendment be agreed to.Ayes41New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7.Noes64New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.Part 1 as amended agreed to.Progress to be reported presently.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill with amendment and that the Committee had divided it into two bills and progress on the Vulnerable Children Bill.Report adopted.
Vote: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendment be agreed to.Ayes56New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Noes63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 447 in the name of Le’aufa’amulia Asenati Lole-Taylor to insert new clause 27B be agreed to.
Vote: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendment be agreed to.Ayes56New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Noes63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes56New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 435 in the name of the Hon Paula Bennett to Part 1 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 436 in the name of Jacinda Ardern to clause 9 be agreed to.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17800. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes112New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; Mana 1; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes7New Zealand First 7.Clause 1 agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 442 in the name of the Hon Craig Foss to clause 2 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Clause 2 as amended agreed to.The Committee divided the bill into the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Amendment Bill and the Financial Service Providers (Registration and Dispute Resolution) Amendment Billpursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 443.Bill to be reported with amendment presently.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17800. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes78New Zealand National 59; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; Mana 1; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes41New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7.Motion agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 68 Noes 41.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17792. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat schedule 4 be agreed to.Ayes112New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Noes7New Zealand First 7.Schedule 4 agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 113 Noes 7.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17791. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes112New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Noes7New Zealand First 7.Amendments agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 113 Noes 7.Schedule 3 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17791. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes112New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Noes7New Zealand First 7.Amendments agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 113 Noes 7.Schedule 2 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17791. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes112New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Noes7New Zealand First 7.Amendments agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 113 Noes 7.Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17790. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes112New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Noes7New Zealand First 7.Amendments agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 113 Noes 7.Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): We have the Minister’s amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 435 and the other one was—Dr Kennedy Graham: Four hundred and thirty-four I think.The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): That one was agreed to on voices. So the Minister’s amendments—just one moment. The Minister’s amendments as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 435 were agreed to on voices. There was no party vote called for so we cannot record a party vote because I have already announced the result.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 447 in the name of Le’aufa’amulia Asenati Lole-Taylor to insert new clause 27A be agreed to.
Graham Kennedy: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGraham Kennedy: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. It is just to enter one correction with regard to the Minister’s Supplementary Order Papers 434 and 435. Mana records a negative vote in both cases.
Hayes John: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes John: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa): I moveThat the question be now put.
Ross Jami-Lee: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17811. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Bennett Paula: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBennett Paula: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17806. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development): I just wanted to respond quickly on Supplementary Order Paper 438 and Supplementary Order Paper 447 by the member who has just resumed her seat Le’aufa’amulia Asenati Lole-Taylor. I just want you to know that whether to include volunteers or not was extensively canvassed. I have not got the number right in front of me but over 200000 people—I think it was 375000 people actually—need to be vetted and screened through all agencies and Government departments.So when we really got down to it some of your argument is valid. There is no doubt about it. There is evidence of people in volunteer organisations and in volunteer roles sexually and violently abusing children in the past. When we looked at it there is absolutely nothing stopping those organisations from screening volunteers and a lot of them do it now voluntarily. I do not really want to name those organisations because I think they are doing a great job and I do not want to give them undue notice in this Chamber that they do not deserve. But there are a whole lot of volunteers who are screened and vetted who are working with kids.We felt that we had literally hundreds of thousands to get through to make sure we had it all right. I have got to say that if the argument got to a point where we were ready to take on that next lot which is the volunteers and we had all the structures up then I personally would be very keen to take that to Cabinet and see that happen. I do think that it is perhaps the next step but I do not think we are quite ready for it.I just wanted to clarify that bus drivers and taxi drivers as well—anyone who is contracted by for instance the Ministry of Education or the Ministry of Social Development through disability or vocational services would be included because they are contractors.I hear what you have said. I want you to know that we really did. We went back and forth about three or four times on it. Where we landed was: let us get it right for Government departments and those whom we contract with and if the will is to take that next step then I think you would find that we would be well ready to have that debate.
Tisch Lindsay: Voting — Correction—Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform BillText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Voting — Correction—Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17806. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Members during the last debate on the Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill the votes on the closure motion to clause 1 should read 78 in favour and 41 opposed. The original figures I gave were 68 and 41; they should be 78 in favour and 41 opposed. The record will be amended accordingly.
Tisch Lindsay: Vulnerable Children Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Vulnerable Children Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17801. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): This debate includes schedules 1 and 2.
Ross Jami-Lee: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17800. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Martin Tracey: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17799. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): I take this opportunity to rise to speak to the Minister’s statement previously around parties that are opposing the bill. New Zealand First is opposing the bill; the Minister in the chair the Minister of Consumer Affairs is quite right. He is however quite wrong in everything else he had to say at that time. New Zealand First is opposing the bill because New Zealand First does not do half jobs.Although there are many positive reforms inside this bill there are practicalities and realities of the people who have come to talk to us—the people actually affected; the people whom the Minister stood up and passionately professed to care about. They have come to see us and talk to us about the fact that although all those other protections are there and they can use them in a legal sense they still have to take somebody through that legal process. They still have to make sure that that person follows the rules as opposed to a very very simple mechanism which is to place a cap on interest rates. That is all that those people asked for.So if we were going to rename this bill possibly what we should rename it to is—actually National members do not really like getting their hands inside business and this is business as far as they can see it. So although they put in all these other supposed safeguards the poor consumer—poor consumer in the fact that they are borrowing money from unscrupulous people who have no conscience whatsoever about the waythat they prey on these families—and those families will still have to go and see an agency. Those families will still actually have to fight to make sure that if the rules are not followed they then have to go through that process. It still puts a burden on the borrower.How much better would it have been for this Committee to truly stand up for the borrower and say: “Over this percentage of interest rate is exorbitant.” If the Government had been able to truly participate in a practical way to support those families and to support Ms Beaumont’s Supplementary Order Paper 430 New Zealand First would be voting for the bill. But New Zealand First will not do a half-pie job. New Zealand First will not put through legislation merely because it upsets the Minister when it does not truly address the issue and truly help the people at the bottom of this bill.So if the Minister wants to know—actually we are not at all interested in what the Minister wants to know. If New Zealanders out there want to know why New Zealand First will oppose this bill in the same way we opposed the Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill it is because we actually listened to the people it would have an effect on. We represent them here in this Parliament. This bill does not go far enough and we will not just tick it off for the pleasure of the National Government.
Macindoe Tim: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17799. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Macindoe Tim: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17794. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (Junior Whip—National): I apologise for the interruption to this debate but I have just become aware of an email that was sent late in the dinner adjournment as a result of which I seek leave for all the votes that I have cast since the dinner adjournment on behalf of the Māori Party to be adjusted from three to two.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? There appears not. Leave is granted. The record will show that.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17790. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes78New Zealand National 59; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Noes41New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7.Motion agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 79 Noes 41.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 442 in the name of the Hon Craig Foss to Part 2 be agreed to.
Roy Eric: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17792. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Clare Beaumont.
Vote: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17781. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill be now read a third time.Ayes113New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Noes7New Zealand First 7.Bill read a third time.
Roy Eric: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17790. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): Order! I have already ruled on that and I made it quite clear that the member should be speaking about Part 2. [Interruption] I have ruled on the point of order. If the member is seeking to redress that he is on dangerous ground.Andrew Williams: I do not like threats thank you Mr Chair.The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): The member will now leave the Chamber.Andrew Williams withdrew from the Chamber.
Williams Andrew: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Andrew: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17790. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ANDREW WILLIAMS (NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If the Minister is going to criticise New Zealand First—
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17790. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Roy Eric: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Credit Contracts and Financial Services Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17790. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): This speech is terminated. Is anybody else seeking a call?
Tisch Lindsay: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17781. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Just before I move to the next item of business can I just remind members that if they want a party vote they must challenge the Speaker at the time when the vote is given. I just remind members thatthey must challenge me and ask for a party vote. A party vote does not just follow automatically because a party votes no to the question.
Hauiti Claudette: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHauiti Claudette: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17780. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CLAUDETTE HAUITI (National): Ka whakatūria Te Pouhere Taonga hei tiaki i ngā wāhi nui tae atu ki atu ki ngā whare tawhito.[Te Pouhere Taonga was established to protect significant places including ancient buildings of significance.]This Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill is not just about bricks and mortar; it is also about earth and sea where these totally suppressed or invisible taonga these stories can now come to light—the protection and registration ofwāhi tapu by putting a historic context to these sites as a result of the strengthening role of theMāori Heritage Council. It assists the development of bicultural governance—identifying gaps in information at manaaki whānau where they have been impacted—and advocacy which gives effect to our words and our world.Ka tautoko ahau i tēnei pire ki te Whare nei.[I endorse this bill to this House.]Kia ora.
Goldsmith Paul: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoldsmith Paul: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17777. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): I would like to support the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill which delivers on National’s promise to improve governance in the arts and heritage area.I just wanted to draw attention to what is obviously a very significant place in our nation’s history and our heritage. But we do have to be careful to strike a balance between our heritage concerns and the broader social and economic objectives. This legislation I think is better because of the select committee process. There were a lot of submissions from a number of people. A number of people were very concerned about the costs added on to landowners as a result of this work in heritage. They wanted to make sure that we were careful in how we managed it. Clause 12(3) says: “No interest in land may be regarded as having been taken or injuriously affected and no compensation is payable by reason only of any provision of this Act.” It is quite a remarkable thing and there is no question that there are some landowners whose property is very significantly affected in its value by things that happen in this Act.So it was very important that we added in a new clause 12(1A) which notes: “In exercising its power under subsection (1)(a) Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga must recognise the interests of an owner as far as those interests are known in a particular historic place historic area wāhi tūpuna wāhi tapu or wāhi tapu area.” I think that with that clause in there landowners can have a greater confidence that when we are striving hard to maintain the heritage values of New Zealand we are also aware and cognisant of the costs that we put on landowners so as to minimise those and to achieve a greater possible heritage effect as we possibly can at a realistic cost for thosepeople who are just wanting to renovate their house or make some improvements to their property. On that basis I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Dean Jacqui: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17775. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): I acknowledge some of the disquiet that was felt about the disestablishment of branch committees. I just note that as part of the review of the Historic Places Trust there was found to be a lack of clarity around the organisation’s statutory role and also its membership role which led to the disestablishment of the branch committees. However I would say that out of the ashes of the disestablishment have grown some pretty good strong groups that have become good heritage advocates on behalf of their communities.This is no more so than with the Ōāmaru Whitestone Civic Trust which is based in North Otago in Ōāmaru. The Ōāmaru Whitestone Civic Trust is the owner of a number of heritage buildings in and around Ōāmaru and North Otago. As well as being the custodian for the buildings themselves and getting involved in the upgrading and earthquake strengthening of those buildings it has a wider role that it has assumed with the demise of the local committee. It has incorporated many of the local committee people and is an incredibly strong positive group that has a very strong role in the preservation of the heritage of both North Otago and the wider country.The Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill is a good bill. There were a number of provisions brought in by the changes made by the Local Government and Environment Committee but it serves for me only to commend this bill to the House.
Ross Jami-Lee: Food Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Food Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17765. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany): I commend the Food Bill to the House.Bill read a second time.
Roy Eric: Food Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Food Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17763. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call—5 minutes.
Hayes Joanne: Food Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Food Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 13 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17763. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): This is going to be a very short call in support of the Food Bill at its second reading. Lots of good words have been said today in the House and as a food producer—both my husband and I are food producers with sheep meat exports—I am really proud to stand here and support the bill.I congratulate the Primary Production Committee on the great work that it continues to do. I commend this bill to the House. Kia ora.