edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 56.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 69 in the name of Chris Penk to insert new clause 7 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 56New Zealand National 56.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 70 in the name of the Hon Tim Macindoe to insert new clause 7 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 56New Zealand National 56.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.New clause 7 not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 71 in the name of the Hon Tim Macindoe to insert new clause 7 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 56New Zealand National 56.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.
Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill — In Committee—New Clauses 7 (Party Rules)
Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Clause 6
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 56.Motion agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That clause 6 be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 56; ACT New Zealand 1.Clause 6 agreed to.
Smith Nick; Rurawhe AdrianHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): Thank you Mr Chairman. The clause that we now debate is in respect of section 129 of the Electoral Act and the issue of by-elections. I firstly want to make the point of how significant it is that we have electors—45000 people in an area—voting for a member of Parliament as they have in this Parliament for over 160 years and now we're giving the power for a party leader to overrule the decision of those 45000 voters in a constituency to dismiss that MP and trigger a by-election. And what we are wanting to do—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm sorry to interrupt the honourable member but the time has come for me to report progress.Progress reported.Report adopted.The House adjourned at 12.56 p.m. (Wednesday)
Rurawhe AdrianNew clause 7 Gazette notice following a vacancyCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): So we now come to the debate on new clause 7 regarding Gazette notices of a vacancy.
SpeechHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I'm sorry I'm just a bit alarmed by what you just said quite genuinely. Is that a new ruling that you've made today? If that ruling was that someone cannot take a point of order while a vote is in progress that is understood; that's long-held. But if it is that a matter that causes the need for a point of order cannot be considered because the vote has started and therefore any ruling coming afterwards is irrelevant that is a problem and that would be quite new. So I'm just quite genuinely asking if that is you or are you still interpreting as we've always understood it to be?CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): So referring to the Speakers' rulings 63/2 and 63/3 Once a vote is commenced it has to be completed. (A member could not move a motion to set aside this rule where voting on a series of amendments was likely to extend into …"—Oh sorry that's not relevant actually; the important bit is that once the vote is commenced it must be completed—and "Until the words the Chair uses to put the question have actually concluded he or she can accept a call at any stage during that time.""
SpeechDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I think there is some explanation required with respect to your refusal to take a point of order as you say during a vote because the Standing Orders are very clear that a point of order takes precedence over any other business. There are no Speakers' rulings on this topic and to further add to the confusion that with the greatest of respect you've created through your conduct you did take a point of order during the vote from Tim Macindoe. So there are now two questions here: is there some part of the Standing Orders or Speakers' rulings that we don't know about that says that there cannot be a point of order during a vote and if there is why does it apply only to Mr Macindoe and not to me?CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm happy to clarify that. The ruling is that while the vote is being conducted—therefore until the vote has been declared—members cannot take a point of order. One must declare the vote first before I can accept a point of order. That is the convention that is—as I understand it—the ruling and that is why I accepted the point of order from the Hon Tim Macindoe because he waited until the vote had been declared.David Seymour: With the greatest of respect Mr Chair—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): So is this a further point of order or are you debating my ruling?David Seymour: I'm seeking clarification on your ruling.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): No that is not a point of order.David Seymour: Well it would be helpful to the order of the House if you could just answer this question.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): No it would be helpful to the order of the House if the member resumed his seat unless he's got a genuine point of order that is not trying to relitigate the decision that I've already made.David Seymour: OK. Well my point of order is as follows.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): So are you calling for a point of order—a new point of order?DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. When a Chair refers to a ruling" is he referring to a ruling in the formal sense that it's in the Speakers' rulings; is he making a ruling as he says that; or is there some other—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): This is not the time to be litigating the ruling that I've just made OK? Any further attempt to do so I will have to deal with it with the Standing Orders available to me."
Rurawhe Adrian; Smith Nick; Brownlee GerryCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Members we had three new proposals for a new clause 7. These are out of order for the following reasons. The Hon Dr Nick Smith's tabled amendment to insert new section 231(1A) to alter the time frame for an electoral petition regarding a vacancy created by the process in this bill is out of order as being outside the scope of the bill. The Hon Dr Nick Smith's tabled amendment to insert new section 267(B3) to prevent Ministers making regulations during a period when an MP has been removed by a party leader is out of order as being outside the scope of the bill. The Hon Dr Nick Smith's tabled amendment to insert new section 55(AAC) to prohibit the same person delivering and receiving the notice would have been in order if it had been dealt with in the debate on clause 5. However it was lodged after the conclusion of the debate on clause 5. Members we now come to—Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I accept your rulings regarding the scope of the new clauses that I have tabled. The third of those deals with the issue specifically of the independence of the office of Speaker. It is possible by leave of the committee for us to consider that. So I seek the leave of the committee for the committee to consider the third amendment that you noted was in order was in scope that specifically deals with the independence of the office of Speaker. So I seek leave.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Members leave has been sought for the committee to go back to clause 5 to debate the amendment as set out in the tabled amendment from the Hon Dr Nick Smith. Is there any objection? There is objection.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. We are due to start a debate on Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 72 and there are no copies of that SOP on the Table at the present time which makes it rather difficult for a number of members of the committee to offer the considered and tight response that I'm sure you will be looking for. I'm not sure how we should progress but it would seem to me it's a rule of the House that whatever's being debated should be on the Table.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I can assure members of the committee that officials are presently bringing those to the Table. I believe a few more are coming—Hon Gerry Brownlee: I congratulate you sir on your miraculous powers.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Yes—ha! Therefore members we come to the debate on—
Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I move That the Speaker be recalled.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): So are you calling for a point of order? Is that your point of order?DAVID SEYMOUR: Well you won't allow points of order so I just moved that the Speaker be recalled.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): No that's out of order. You can sit down—unless you're going to do it properly. The vote is not concluded until the vote has been declared.
Seymour David; Rurawhe AdrianThe question was put that the amendment in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 77 in the name of Chris Bishop to insert new clause 7 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question that the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Point of order Mr Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): We are in a vote Mr Seymour.David Seymour: Well Mr Chair can you point to where in the Standing Orders because Standing Order 88(1)—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Mr Seymour please be seated. We are in a vote. When the result of this vote is declared then you can raise a point of order.David Seymour: With respect Mr Chair the Standing Orders say A point of order takes precedence [over any] other business"—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): No.David Seymour: —"until ruled upon by the Speaker."CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Mr Seymour sit down now."
Seymour David; Rurawhe AdrianThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 76 in the name of Chris Bishop to insert new clause 7 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question that the amendment be agreed to.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Point of order Mr Chair. CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): There is a vote happening. We'll finish this vote.David Seymour: Members have a right to raise a point of order at any time Mr Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): No not during a vote. E noho.David Seymour: Yes we do. We have the right to raise a point of order.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Not during a vote Mr Seymour.David Seymour: Really?CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Really and the member will resume his seat right now.
Macindoe TimHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): We're in a vote.Hon TIM MACINDOE: But it's to do with the vote. When a previous Chair began the discussion of these different Supplementary Order Papers on which we are now voting she very helpfully set out the parameters of the debate into three parts. She indicated that the second of the three would be to debate four Supplementary Order Papers in the name of Mr Bishop which we have been debating now and upon which we are now voting. The reason for my point of order though Sir is that we are actually now voting on a whole lot of other amendments that the Committee had not previously been notified of and which we haven't had an opportunity to debate. Can we now have the chance to debate those please?CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Now I will make this ruling. I've made the ruling that they are included as part of that debate. Members have had a long time to have their Supplementary Order Papers and tabled amendments come to the Table. For whatever reason they have come during that debate and I'm ruling that they are part of this debate and we are now voting on them. [Interruption] And votes are taken in silence.
Lees-Galloway IainHon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): I move That the question be now put.
Lees-Galloway IainHon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Acting Leader of the House): I move That the question be now put.
Rurawhe AdrianNew clause 7 Review of ActCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Members we now come to the debate on new clause 7 regarding the review of the Act. This debate includes four amendments: Supplementary Order Papers 76 77 78 and 79 in the name of Chris Bishop.
Coffey Tamati; Rurawhe AdrianTAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki): I move That the question be now put.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I will take another call but can I just tell members that the constant references to asking members to take a call on it and other references are not part of this bill.
Williams Poto; Smith NickNew clause 7 Party rulesCHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Members we now come to new clause 7. We have a number of proposals for a new clause 7. Several of these are out of order but there are some that I've accepted as new clauses which are therefore separately debatable. I will deal with those shortly but first I will advise the committee of which amendments are out of order.Firstly Chris Bishop's amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 89 is out of order as it is contingent on an amendment already negatived. The Hon Dr Nick Smith's amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 91 is out of order as being out of the scope of the bill. Members we will debate clause 7 in three separate areas starting on the debate on party rules. So members we now turn to the debate on clause 7. The first part will be the debate on party rules.Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I think it would be helpful for the committee if the chair was able to quickly inform us of the amendments—I tell you where I'm a little bit unclear Madam Chair. In one breath you said that the amendments would be debated separately—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Yes.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: —and then you said some provisions would be taken together. Is it possible to clarify for members so that we do remain within your orders around speaking to the amendments as to the numbers or content of the Supplementary Order Papers that we are now debating please?CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): On the new clauses 7 debate on party rules we will be debating with specificity to Supplementary Order Papers 69 70 and 71. Then at the conclusion of that we will debate the new clauses 7 review of the Act—specifically Supplementary Order Papers 76 77 79 and 78. At the conclusion of that debate we will debate new clause 7 with regards to the Gazette notice and that is specifically Supplementary Order Paper 72.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Thank you Madam Chair. The first—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Are you seeking the call? I call the Hon Dr Nick Smith.
Williams PotoTUESDAY 25 SEPTEMBER 2018(continued on Wednesday 26 September 2018)ELECTORAL (INTEGRITY) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed.Clause 6 Section 133 amended (No writ to issue pending election petition) (continued)CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Members the committee is resumed for further consideration of the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill. When we were last considering the bill we were debating clause 6. I understand Chris Bishop had the call and has four minutes 39 seconds remaining should he wish to take it.
Tuesday 25 September 2018 - Volume 733
Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill — In Committee—New Clauses 5A
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 56.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 59 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to insert new clause 5A be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 56New Zealand National 56.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 58 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to insert new clause 5A be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 56New Zealand National 56.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 90 in the name of Chris Bishop to insert new clause 5A be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 56New Zealand National 56.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.
Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Clause 5
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the motion be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 56.Motion agreed to.
12. Question No. 12—Community and Voluntary SectorPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) to the Minister for the Community and Voluntary SectorQuestion No. 12—Community and Voluntary Sector12. PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) to the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector: What recent announcement has he made on the Community Leadership Fund?Hon PEENI HENARE (Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Last week I was proud to announce the successful recipients of this year's Community Leadership Fund - Hapori Whakatipu. The Community Leadership Fund worth half a million dollars offers grants to not-for-profit organisations with a focus on providing leadership and capability either across the whole community and voluntary sector or within a specific interest area of the community and voluntary sector. This announcement was welcomed by the sector who work tirelessly to support our communities.Priyanca Radhakrishnan: What are the outcomes we can expect from this fund?Hon PEENI HENARE: The outcomes that are expected as a result of this funding will recognise the important work of groups in connecting the sector fostering social enterprise and supporting volunteering and community-led development. These organisations will build capability across New Zealand's diverse communities which will result in thriving connected communities in this country.Priyanca Radhakrishnan: Who are the successful recipients of the Community Leadership Fund?Hon Ruth Dyson: Ah good question.Hon PEENI HENARE: Thank you. This year we are proud to be able to fund six organisations. Amongst those organisations are Hui E! Community Aotearoa Philanthropy New Zealand and the Inspiring Communities trust. These organisations are some of New Zealand's most innovative community and voluntary groups who do great work in our communities. One standout in particular the Volunteer Army Foundation provides leadership and capability building for volunteering in New Zealand. The grant will support the foundation's programme of working with young people and schools to develop volunteers for the future.
10. Question No. 10—Energy and ResourcesJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Energy and ResourcesQuestion No. 10—Energy and Resources10. JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Has she seen MBIE advice that her Government's policy to end offshore oil and gas exploration may result in an increase in global greenhouse gas emissions"?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Energy and Resources): Yes.Jonathan Young: Does she agree with Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) advice that her policy to ban new offshore exploration could increase the price of both gas and electricity for New Zealand households and if not why not?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: No I don't agree with that because of the time frames in which we are making these decisions. The very long-term transition that we are charting out because we are honouring all existing oil and gas permits gives us a 40-year time frame and I have confidence that this country can move to 100 percent renewable electricity.Jonathan Young: How much will electricity and gas prices go up as a result of the new offshore exploration ban as gas reserves deplete according to data that MBIE have produced?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: That information is simply not available. What I can tell that member though—if he looks to other reports that have been produced such as the Productivity Commission's report and also the Transpower report—is that actually renewable energy is cheaper per unit than fossil-generated electricity. So actually we could see cheaper electricity prices in this country as a result of an expansion of our renewables base. When the member asks for details like that I think he needs to reflect on what science lies behind the GNS Science modelling the GNS Science modelling that lies behind the economic modelling—that they're being asked to quantify the unquantifiable.Jonathan Young: Does she agree with MBIE's advice that her Government's policy to end new offshore oil and gas exploration could cost the Government billions in lost revenue excluding the impact on the Taranaki economy and the families that will be under pressure with their jobs as a result and if not why not? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: What I do take issue with is the point that the Acting Prime Minister brought up: the very large range that we are dealing here. When we're dealing with a range that goes from $1.2 billion to $23.5 billion we might as well use a crystal ball—we are guessing at this stage. What we can point to is that since 1970 royalties under the New Zealand Government from the oil and gas industry have been $4.1 billion. This includes the Māui find. We have no guarantee that we will have a find of that magnitude again. What I can tell this House will be a cost is if we are a Government that lacks courage to plan for the future. We are not that kind of Government. We are putting in place the long-term plans with the courage to look beyond the three-year political cycle."
9. Question No. 9—FisheriesANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour) to the Minister of FisheriesQuestion No. 9—Fisheries9. ANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour) to the Minister of Fisheries: What recent decisions has he made to ensure the sustainability and utilisation of specific fish stocks?Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Fisheries): The purpose of the Fisheries Act 1996 is to provide for the utilisation of fisheries resources while ensuring sustainability." Recently I have reviewed the total allowable catch and other management controls for 32 stocks as part of the regular twice-yearly sustainability round. There'll be increases to catch limits for 11 stocks such as southern bluefin tuna and orange roughy decreases to catch limits for 12 stocks and the catch limits for the rest of the stocks will remain the same this fishing year. These decisions are based on the best available scientific information and follow public consultation and most come into effect from 1 October this year.Angie Warren-Clark: What has he decided in relation to the rebuild of tarakihi stocks?Hon STUART NASH: The tarakihi fishery is of great social economic and recreational importance to New Zealanders and approximately 90 percent of what is caught commercially is sold within our supermarkets and stores throughout the country. I've decided on a package of measures that is required to get this important fishery back to where it needs to be. I've decided on a phased approach beginning with a 20 percent catch reduction in the first year. The commercial industry has been given eight months to develop and begin executing an innovative plan to rebuild the stock. If the plan is not sufficiently robust then further cuts adding up to 55 percent of the current catch will be introduced for the October 2019 fishing year. The decision I have made reflects my desire to increase the benefits obtained from New Zealand's fisheries whilst ensuring sustainability and working proactively with all key stakeholders.Angie Warren-Clark: How is he supporting the use of innovative technology to ensure the sustainability and utilisation of our fisheries?Hon STUART NASH: Eighty-five percent of our total seafood export volume is made up of wild-captured fish. We hold about a 0.5 percent share of total global production. Consumers in key markets are increasingly demanding environmental sustainability and veracity of our seafood products. In order to maintain and enhance our global brand it is important that we develop and facilitate the use of innovative gear technology such as precision seafood harvesting that has the potential to reduce bycatch and minimise damage to fish. Further electronic reporting will enable more informed and faster decisions about managing our fisheries to maximise their recreational cultural commercial and environmental value."
7. Question No. 7—Economic DevelopmentTAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister for Economic DevelopmentQuestion No. 7—Economic Development7. TAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister for Economic Development: What steps if any is the Government taking to improve the productivity of the New Zealand economy?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for Economic Development): We're encouraging productive rather than speculative investment to transition our economy from volume to value. Our R & D tax credit is a billion-dollar tax break for businesses investing in innovation. The $3 billion Provincial Growth Fund is already revitalising our long-neglected regions. The Green Investment Fund will incentivise investment in new technology and the tax review is advising on other tax changes needed to better allocate investment capital to the productive sector. Finally we're also protecting New Zealand exporters from rising protectionism abroad via an ambitious and successful trade agenda.Tamati Coffey: Why is improving New Zealand's productivity particularly important now?Hon DAVID PARKER: We're in the midst of a technology revolution in the world and if we had sat on our hands the New Zealand economy would continue to be dominated by housing speculation population growth and low productivity. Instead we're making important changes to help ensure that New Zealand creates and sustains the better-paid jobs and higher standard of living that new technology can deliver. It's the duty of Government to make sure New Zealand gets our share of the productivity improvements the new products the new jobs and the higher wages that these new technologies can bring and this Government's doing just that.Tamati Coffey: What reports has he seen about the success of the Government's economic approach?Hon DAVID PARKER: As the Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr recently said and I quote All signals are green for business investment". Runaway house price inflation has been tamed which has both increased the proportion of homes sold to first-home buyers while encouraging greater investment in our productive export sectors. Real business investment which excludes residential building is up 5.1 percent year on year and this is one of the reasons why unemployment remains low while wages are increasing. The latest 1 percent increase in GDP for the quarter reinforces the long-term statistic that growth under Governments on this side of the House exceeds average growth under National Governments since World War II."
6. Question No. 6—FinanceHon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 6—Finance6. Hon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement to Newstalk ZB last week in regard to the Tax Working Group that One of the things we have written and asked the group to do is to come back to us with a package which is as we say revenue neutral"; if so will he guarantee New Zealanders that any changes based on the Tax Working Group recommendations will be revenue-neutral?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Yes. And in answer to the second part of the question as we have consistently stated no decisions will be made until after the Tax Working Group's final report is delivered in February.Hon Amy Adams: Is the reason he won't make this commitment to New Zealand because he plans to use new taxes to fill up the $8 billion revenue gap that the Government's oil and gas decision is leaving in the Crown accounts?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I completely reject the premise of that question.Hon Amy Adams: Well will the Government rule out bringing in a capital gains tax on small businesses retirement savings and rental properties to incentivise New Zealanders to work to save and to grow the supply of rental houses?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I've stated final decisions will be made once we see the Tax Working Group's final report. What we definitely have ruled out—definitely—is any kind of capital tax on the family home and the member might want to speak to Paul Goldsmith who seemed to think that was a good idea on Thursday.Hon Amy Adams: Why does he think that a capital gains tax will help housing costs when the Tax Working Group themselves have said that tax is not the main driver of high house prices and the cause of unaffordable housing is straightforward: New Zealand is simply not building enough houses?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: It is of great comfort to me that that revelation has dawned on the member after nine years of denying that there was a housing crisis. On this side of the House we do accept that we need to build more houses especially more affordable houses and guess what? We're getting on with doing it.Hon Amy Adams: Has he seen comments by the Rt Hon Winston Peters in 2017 who said that a capital gains tax was "off the table … it doesn't work and … there is no fairness" in it?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I've seen comments from the Rt Hon Winston Peters in 2018 where he said that everybody should wait until the final report of the working group comes back."
4. Question No. 4—EducationJENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 4—Education4. JENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister of Education: What response has she had to the release of the Government's Disability and Learning Support Action Plan discussion document?Hon TRACEY MARTIN (Acting Minister of Education): Feedback to date has been overwhelmingly positive. I met with a broad range of stakeholders prior to the announcement including principals organisations unions parents groups disability organisations special schools representatives of alternative education activity centres and support groups for gifted children and dyslexia and other difficulties. They gave very positive feedback and a number of useful comments. It was great to also see that there is support for this plan across the House and I acknowledge the comments by the Hon Nikki Kaye at the weekend commending the work to support children with complex needs and stating that this is a time when parties could come together to agree more needs to be done.Jenny Marcroft: What are the main points being consulted on?Hon TRACEY MARTIN: The draft action plan proposes to enhance the education system's ability to support all children and young people by the development of universal screening tools improving the way the education system responds to neuro-diverse and gifted learners through the development of information and other supports for teachers providing a flexible support package for children and young people who are neuro-diverse and other children and young people who are not eligible for ongoing resourcing scheme creating a new learning support coordinator role in schools and kura and responding to pressures in a number of specific supports such as early intervention intensive wraparound service New Zealand Sign Language and deaf education and residential special schools.Chlöe Swarbrick: How does this action plan address the 43 recommendations from the Education and Science Committee's inquiry into dyslexia dyspraxia and autism spectrum disorders last term instigated by former Green MP Catherine Delahunty?Hon TRACEY MARTIN: I thank the member for her question. This represents the first set of recommendations from that minority view and from that inquiry. Can I acknowledge the previous member of Parliament Catherine Delahunty but can I also acknowledge the Hon Judith Collins and the support that she gave that inquiry to get it across the line.Jenny Marcroft: Why is the Government looking at universal screening?Hon TRACEY MARTIN: We want to be able to identify earlier if a child needs learning support so that we can respond earlier to their needs. This will reduce negative impacts on their learning and for some children and young people the need for more serious interventions later on. The focus on screening responds to the submissions to the inquiry as mentioned just earlier and into the identification and support of students with significant challenges of dyslexia dyspraxia and autism spectrum disorders in primary and secondary schools.
2. Question No. 2—FinanceKIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 2—Finance2. KIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): On Friday international credit rating agency Moody's reaffirmed the New Zealand Government's Aaa rating—Hon Members: Yay!Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: —with a stable outlook. This is—SPEAKER: Order! Order!Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: —the highest score it can give. The Moody's assessment was underpinned by its expectation that New Zealand's strong institutions and strong fiscal position will mitigate the impact of any major external or domestic shocks and provide the flexibility in being able to respond. Moody's said that they expect the coalition Government comprising the Labour Party New Zealand First and the Green Party to remain committed to fiscal discipline as shown in the Budget projections for continued fiscal surplus and Government debt reduction. This report underscores the Government's responsible fiscal management and the fact that we are investing in critical public services that New Zealanders deserve.Kiritapu Allan: What other reports has he seen on the current strength of the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: This morning Business New Zealand released its planning forecast for the September 2018 quarter which highlighted continued growth in the New Zealand economy. The Business New Zealand Economic Conditions Index a measure of New Zealand's major economic indicators is at 5 for the September quarter up 3 on a year ago—up 3 on a year ago. The report shows that despite some risks including from international protectionism and uncertainty the economy is forecast to grow at around 3 percent out to September 2020. While this is good news the Government knows that—SPEAKER: Order! Order! Enough.Kiritapu Allan: What reports has he seen on the strength of particular sectors in the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Just to name one Beef and Lamb New Zealand released research this morning which shows 68 percent of sheep and beef farmers surveyed in August are confident about the future—the highest reading in the history of the survey. This research comes on the back of last week's GDP figures showing the New Zealand economy had its best performance for two years in that quarter and business investment is up 5.7 percent from a year ago. On this side of the House we acknowledge all the people in New Zealand who make that happen and just ask the National Party to cheer up a tiny bit.
Rurawhe AdrianCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I am going to let the members know again that this is a narrow debate. There is not a lot in this. I've let both previous speakers go beyond insert 'or 55A'." but I am letting members know."
Tolley AnneNew clause 5A Courts' treatment of ActCHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Members we now have three amendments that relate to how the courts treat the bill set out on Supplementary Order Papers 58 59 and 90. These will be debated together but with the questions put separately.
van de Molen TimTIM VAN DE MOLEN (Third Whip—National): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Thank you Madam Chair. Look it just comes really to a matter of standards within the House I suppose. I'd just like to draw your attention to a couple of aspects and notably one that you ruled on in the last sitting day as well with regard to these fine boxes that we have on top of our desks. I note the New Zealand First Party—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Ah yes. I see the evidence.TIM VAN DE MOLEN: —still have one up there and also the Labour Party. In addition to that if I may continue with regard to Speaker's Ruling 16/3—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Could I have the Government whip remove it thank you.TIM VAN DE MOLEN: —electronic devices—again the New Zealand First member with the laptop on the desk. It's just a matter of standards. I know they are a minor party in this Labour-led Government but it would—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Thank you. [Interruption] Thank you very much. Do you have any further points of order?
Rurawhe AdrianClause 5 New Sections 55AAB to 55E insertedCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Members we come to the debate on clause 5. Before we get to the debate we have a number of proposals to amend clause 5. Several of these are out of order but there are several that I have accepted and can be debated as part of the debate on this clause. First I will advise the committee which amendments are out of order and cannot be debated.Ian McKelvie's amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 80 is out of order as being inconsistent with the principles and objects of the bill as agreed at the second reading. Ian McKelvie's amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 81 is out of order as being inconsistent with the principles and objects of the bill as agreed at the second reading. Denise Lee's amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 83 is out of order as being inconsistent with the principles and objects of the bill as agreed at the second reading. Simeon Brown's amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 85 is out of order as being outside the scope of the bill. The Hon Dr Nick Smith's amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 56 is out of order as being inconsistent with the principles and objects of the bill as agreed at the second reading.
Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill — In Committee—New Clauses 4A
Rurawhe AdrianELECTORAL (INTEGRITY) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed from 9 August.New clause 4A New clause inserting new section 54ACHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Members the House is in committee for further consideration of the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill. When we were last considering the bill we had just concluded the debate on clause 4.We now come to proposed new clauses 4A. Tabled amendments inserting new clauses 4A to insert new section 54A relating to retrospective changes in the terms of office of members of Parliament for various electoral districts and list members are all out of order as being inconsistent with the principles and objectives of the bill as agreed at the second reading. Members with those amendments are the Hon Jacqui Dean Denise Lee Stuart Smith the Hon Dr Nick Smith Matt Doocey Chris Bishop Jonathan Young the Hon Mark Mitchell Sarah Dowie Dan Bidois Shane Reti Jo Hayes and the Hon Alfred Ngaro. I'm advising members that there will be no debate on these amendments.
Lees-Galloway IainSITTINGS OF THE HOUSEHon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Acting Leader of the House): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. I move That the sitting of the House today be extended into tomorrow morning for further consideration in committee of the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill the third reading of the Maritime Powers Extension Bill the interrupted first reading of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) the first reading of the Equal Pay Amendment Bill consideration in committee of the Telecommunications (New Regulatory Framework) Amendment Bill the second reading of the Commerce (Criminalisation of Cartels) Amendment Bill and the second reading of the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill (No 2).
Urgent Debates — Hon Meka Whaitiri—Removal as Minister (continued)
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 10 to Minister 19 September
Urgent Debates — Hon Meka Whaitiri—Removal as Minister
Points of Order — Written Questions—Questions Not Answered
Visitors — Saudi Arabia Shura Council and Australian Senate Community Affairs Legislation and References Committee
Smith Nick; Tolley Anne; Robertson GrantHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. You'll be aware that the Opposition has been asking questions about the very issue of these Gmails for four weeks. The previous Speaker at the time asked the Minister to in fact bring them to the House and make them available to the House. My request for the Minister to consider is whether he will table the emails that he inadvertently did not disclose in my questions last Thursday.DEPUTY SPEAKER: I'm just going to seek a bit of advice. Thank you.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): That material is now in the public arena—all of it—and actually I'd be denied leave to table it in the House under the current Speakers' rulings. But it is available to the member.Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker. To be helpful—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Are you speaking to the same point of order?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Yes I am. My understanding from the Minister is that the additional emails that he was referring to in his answer were those that had been publicly made available by Mr Derek Handley this morning. If that is the fact as he assures then it is not relevant for my request. At the time I made the request I wasn't aware that he was referring to those particular emails.DEPUTY SPEAKER: OK. That settles it. The difficulty I had of course was the question at question time. But everyone's happy. We will continue.
Robertson GrantAMENDED ANSWERS TO ORAL QUESTIONSQuestion No. 10 to Minister 19 SeptemberHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I seek leave of the House to correct an answer given to an oral question.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that? No there isn't.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On 19 September in my answer to question No. 10 I inadvertently left out three emails from the first exchange between Clare Curran and Derek Handley that began on 11 August. I was unaware at the time of giving the answer that there were two further emails on 11 August from Clare Curran in response to Mr Handley's original email and an email from Mr Handley on 13 August to begin the process for setting up a phone call. I apologise to the House for that.
Mallard TrevorURGENT DEBATESHon Meka Whaitiri—Removal as a MinisterSPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon Amy Adams seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the Prime Minister's removal of the Hon Meka Whaitiri as a Minister. It is a particular case of recent occurrence that involves ministerial responsibility. The removal of a Minister is a significant matter. After weighing up the circumstances and the public interest in ministerial probity I have decided to allow the debate to be held today. Therefore I call on the Hon Amy Adams to move that the House take note of an urgent matter of public importance.
Brownlee GerryPOINTS OF ORDERWritten Questions—Questions Not AnsweredHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker while you preside over question time each day and I presume hope that the Government will give answers to the questions that are asked I assume also that you keep an eye on written questions where of course the duty to answer should be far greater for Ministers. There have been a significant number of Ministers who have suggested that even so few days as five would present such an insurmountable problem to them to compile their programme over that time that they simply can't answer the question without specifics.SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. I think the member is aware of the proper process for bringing this up or at least a number of his colleagues are and that involves first of all contacting the Minister's office; secondly contacting my office and me; and if all that fails then we bring it to the House. Unless the member has a specific example that's gone through that process and has ended with a specific question and answer then we'll leave it there.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I thank you for that. Can you then give us some advice about the specific question that should be asked of a Minister who has refused to answer a specific question?SPEAKER: Absolutely. Give me a note and I'll reply.
Mallard TrevorVISITORSSaudi Arabia—Saudi Arabia Shura CouncilSPEAKER: Members I'm sure that members would wish to welcome two delegations present in the gallery: delegates from the Saudi Arabia Shura Council led by Mr Khalid Abdullah Al Abdulateef.Australia—Australian Senate Community Affairs Legislation and References CommitteeSPEAKER: And members of the Australian Senate Community Affairs Legislation and References Committee led by Senator Rachel Siewert.
Mallard Trevor; Huo RaymondTUESDAY 25 SEPTEMBER 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.PRAYERSSPEAKER: Members in light of the fact that it is Chinese Language Week I've asked Mr Raymond Huo to recite the prayer today in Mandarin.RAYMOND HUO (Labour): 万能的主对主赐予的福泽我们心怀感念。抛开所有私利我们报谢女王祈祷为我们的践行带来指引。让我们用智慧、正义、怜悯和谦逊处理国会事务为新西兰的福祉与和平做出奉献。阿门。
Thursday 20 September 2018 - Volume 733
12. Question No. 12—Commerce and Consumer AffairsANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer AffairsQuestion No. 12—Commerce and Consumer Affairs12. ANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What measures has the Government announced to protect the public from unscrupulous wheel-clamping practices?Hon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): Recently transport Minister Phil Twyford and I announced a new Government measure that will enforce a cap of $100 to be charged for the removal of a wheel-clamp. This move has been done to protect consumers from the behaviour of wheel-clampers who have gone unchecked for years. We acknowledge there is a legitimate need to protect private property but the practices of what has become a cowboy clamping industry is causing significant harm to consumers.Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki: Why has the Government implemented these changes?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The Government was tired of hearing about cowboy clampers using stand-over tactics to squeeze unfair fees out of motorists. Stories of mostly elderly motorists being targeted by clampers within minutes of parking and being charged as much as $700—Hon Member: How much?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: —$700—for the removal of wheel-clamps were far too frequent. The charges were excessive and were causing financial loss and emotional distress. The coalition Government is one that cares about protecting consumers and I thank the New Zealand First Party and the Green Party for their support.Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki: What will the consequences be for cowboy clampers if they don't comply?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Well as I said there is a maximum $100 charge for the removal of a wheel-clamp. Infringement fees of $1000 for an individual and $5000 for a company can be charged and a fine of up to $3000 for an individual and $15000 for a company can be imposed if the matter goes to court.