edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Hayes Joanne: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6533. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.JOANNE HAYES (National) to the Minister for Women: What reports has she received relating to the benefits of employing women in trades and construction for the Canterbury rebuild?Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Women): I was thrilled to launch the Ministry for Women’s report Getting it done: Utilising women’s skills in the workforce in Christchurch on Tuesday. This report presents the lessons learned in Canterbury which can work in all parts of New Zealand to encourage employers industry groups training organisations and schools to increase the number of women training and working in trades and construction jobs. The report was a collaboration between the Ministry for Women and its partners in Canterbury including the Canterbury Employers’ Chamber of Commerce Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology the Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Rebuild Team and the National Association of Women in Construction.Joanne Hayes: What evidence does she have that employing women in industries such as construction can be beneficial for businesses?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: The Ministry for Women commissioned research in the year 2013 to better understand why women were not applying for construction jobs given that there was a demand in Canterbury. Their research found that women were available and wanted to work and they were open to working in construction but there was a perception that these were jobs for the boys. Women employees bring benefits to businesses such as stronger connections with customers improved business performance and greater diversity of leadership. Construction is one of the many growing industries where there is a shortage of women. However over the past 2 years the number of women in construction has more than doubled in Canterbury. I think that this is a great result for New Zealand women for Canterbury and for New Zealand.Joanne Hayes: How can the findings from this report be rolled out to other regions around New Zealand?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: With the high demand for skilled workers in industries varying from trades and construction to engineering and IT forecast to continue some businesses are continuing to have difficulty in attracting skilled workers to fill these jobs. These industries are likely to drive New Zealand’s growth in the next 5 to 10 years and it makes good business sense to attract more women to industries that have been traditionally male orientated. I encourage employers to learn from Canterbury the actions that they can take to attract and retain more women in their businesses and to look forward to ways to better utilise women leaders and talents when going through recruitment.Sue Moroney: I seek leave to table a document from the Employment and Vocational Guidance Service. It is a poster “Girls Can Do Anything” from the mid—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume her seat and stop trifling with the House.
Muller Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMuller Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6531. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty) to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent reports has he received on growth in kiwifruit exports?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries): Recent reports show that Zespri’s total New Zealand - grown fruit and service payments are up 17 percent this year to $939 million. The volumes of New Zealand - grown kiwifruit sales are up 11 percent to over $95 million trays and global kiwifruit sales are up 16 percent to over $1.5 billion. Kiwifruit orchard prices are now higher than they were pre-Psa and kiwifruit volumes are forecast to increase by about 36 percent to 130 million trays in 2019-20.Todd Muller: What is the Government doing to help support this growth in the kiwifruit industry?Hon NATHAN GUY: The Government will continue to support the kiwifruit industry through research and development and by enabling greater market access. The Government has committed $25 million in partnership with the kiwifruit industry to assist with managing the impact of Psa including new research. Under the Korean free-trade agreement kiwifruit exporters will have duty-free access to the Korean market 5 years after its entry into force. New Zealand’s kiwifruit exporters paid over $20 million in duties last year. Through our trade deal with Chinese Taipei all duties on kiwifruit will be eliminated over the first 3 years with an estimated annual duty saving of nearly $15 million.
Reti Shane: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeReti Shane: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6527. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.Dr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei) to the Minister of Health: Can he confirm that 36076 colonoscopies were performed in the last financial year a 12 percent increase on the year before?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Yes I can. The number of colonoscopies performed in the 2014-15 financial year rose by 12 percent on the previous year up from 32324 to 36076. Additionally the percentage of urgent colonoscopies being performed within the 14-day target increased from 55 percent in June 2014 to 75 percent in June 2015. This improvement shows that real progress is being made and further projects are under way in district health boards to increase the number of patients being seen.Dr Shane Reti: How is this increased volume of colonoscopies helping develop a possible roll-out of the national bowel screening programme?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: District health boards have been provided with additional funding to provide more colonoscopies and we are working hard to boost the endoscopy workforce by increasing training and technology. The Ministry of Health is consulting with the sector on the next steps towards a possible national bowel screening programme. Already more than 6000 people have received a colonoscopy through the Waitematā District Health Board’s bowel screening pilot. Budget 2015 invested $12.4 million in extending the pilot to December 2017. Do not forget: Labour said that this was a priority but over 9 years it did not put a single dollar into it.
Carter David: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6525. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: No I do not need any further assistance on the matter. We are taking too much time here. If a Minister answers by saying the information will be available readily or shortly I expect it to be available readily or shortly and not delayed for 6 or 8 weeks. I would invite the member if there are such occasions like that to actually come and see me and mention them specifically to me. It is probably a better way forward than raising them as points of order in the House.
Brownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6524. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I do not think the mechanism of asking a question has ever been available for any member to beat some of the genuine concerns that there will be that require some documents that will become public to remain confidential for an extended period of time. [Interruption]
Mark Ron: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6524. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): Thank you for your ruling. It is an issue that has vexed us for a little while now. Can I bring to your attention and ask for you to further deliberate on—and if you require some specific documentary evidence we are quite happy to provide that for you—the new trend of Ministers refusing to provide information or reports under the Official Information Act stating that they will be releasing those reports soon and then not releasing those reports for some 6 to 8 weeks.
Carter David: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6524. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I think that is exactly what I have just read out to members. If it is a reference to information that is publicly available I expect the Minister in the answer to direct that member to where that information is easily obtainable and that must be done with some particularity.Ron Mark: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: A fresh point of order? Ron Mark—a fresh point of order.
Hipkins Chris: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6524. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): The Leader of the House makes an interesting point. This issue also arises in relation to another ruling that you have made around the tabling of documents where you have indicated that if documents are publicly available then leave should not be sought to table them and the onus is on the member seeking leave to table them to establish whether they are publicly available. This involves a similar amount of work in some cases to the amount of work that the Leader of the House is referring to in providing answers indicating that information is already publicly available. I think that the same principle should apply. If a Minister is going to indicate that information is publicly available they need to actually do the work to ascertain that in fact it is publicly available and to give as your ruling has indicated a much more specific indication of where that information can be obtained.
Brownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Rulings — Written Questions—Availability of Material Referred to in Answers[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6524. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am just seeking a little bit of clarification on your ruling—not questioning your ruling. The question it seems to me is: who determines what is readily available in the public arena? The point I made yesterday was that when the questions go in for either estimates or appropriations that information is available in the public arena but is it considered to be readily available? It takes an awful lot of work on the part of Ministers’ offices to go through and be particularly specific in many cases. I would have thought it reasonable that there should be an equal amount of work done by those who are seeking the answer in the first place.
Brownlee Gerry: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6523. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): Pursuant to Standing Order 56(1)(a) I move That the sitting of the House on Wednesday 16 September 2015 be extended from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Thursday 17 September 2015 as advised to the Business Committee for the consideration of Government notices of motion Nos 1 through 4 the third reading of the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill and the first reading of the Building (Pools) Amendment Bill.Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Business Statement[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6523. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on 15 September it is the Government’s intention to progress a number of first readings on the Order Paper including the Māori Purposes Bill the International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill and the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Register) Bill. Wednesday will be a members’ day.Grant Robertson: A good day’s work Gerry.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I tell you what: only you would know. You are the expert in this House.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the House would be better not to bring me into the debate.
Carter David: Visitors — Timor-Leste—Delegation Women’s Parliamentary CaucusText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Visitors — Timor-Leste—Delegation Women’s Parliamentary Caucus[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6523. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I am sure that members would wish to welcome a parliamentary delegation representing the Women’s Parliamentary Caucus from the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste who are present in the gallery. [Applause]
Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSittings of the House[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6523. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Sittings of the HouseHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): Pursuant to Standing Order 56(1)(a) I move That the sitting of the House on Wednesday 16 September 2015 be extended from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Thursday 17 September 2015 as advised to the Business Committee for the consideration of Government notices of motion Nos 1 through 4 the third reading of the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill and the first reading of the Building (Pools) Amendment Bill.Motion agreed to.
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6523. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Business StatementHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on 15 September it is the Government’s intention to progress a number of first readings on the Order Paper including the Māori Purposes Bill the International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill and the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Register) Bill. Wednesday will be a members’ day.Grant Robertson: A good day’s work Gerry.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I tell you what: only you would know. You are the expert in this House.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the House would be better not to bring me into the debate.
Visitors — Timor-Leste—Delegation Women’s Parliamentary CaucusText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVisitors — Timor-Leste—Delegation Women’s Parliamentary Caucus[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6523. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 10 September 2015Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.VisitorsTimor-Leste—Delegation Women’s Parliamentary CaucusMr SPEAKER: I am sure that members would wish to welcome a parliamentary delegation representing the Women’s Parliamentary Caucus from the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste who are present in the gallery. [Applause]
Vote: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6370. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Employment Standards Legislation Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 107New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 12; Mori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee.
Vote: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6352. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill be reported to the House by 22 October 2015 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Motion agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6346. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee.
Vote: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Bill read a second time.
Tisch Lindsay: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6380. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. The time has come for me to leave the Chair. This debate is interrupted and set down for resumption next sitting day. The House is suspended and I will resume the Chair at 9 a.m. tomorrow for the extended sitting.Debate interrupted.
Mathers Mojo: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMathers Mojo: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6379. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MOJO MATHERS (Green): I want to speak in support of the Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) on behalf of the Green Party. I was on the select committee when the petition was being considered by the Government Administration Committee. As well as the sheer number of people who have supported the petition the quality of the evidence that was presented by the petitioner Kyle Lockwood was of a very high standard. With a depth of the research he had gone into researching all the countries around the world that have a longer passport period the reasons why how we were actually out of step with where the rest of the world was going with having longer passport periods and how the concerns around security were no longer a rationale for keeping to a short passport time. So it was looking at that evidence and discussing backwards and forwards with the officials that persuaded the Government Administration Committee that we actually needed to recommend going back to 10-year passports. This is what the public wanted.Passports are part of many people’s extensive documentation in New Zealand both for identification but also because New Zealanders love travelling and a high proportion of New Zealanders do travel. They go to meet with family and friends around the world—in the Pacific Islands in Australia and further afield. We are a nation of migrants and we often want to reach out to friends and family in other countries. So passports are extremely important to New Zealanders and having to renew them effectively every 4½ years was incredibly stressful for many families. It is not just the cost; it is the inconvenience and the hassle planning for a trip and then going to look for your passport and suddenly realising that you have got to actually reapply for your passport and all the hassle that is associated with collecting and collating the documentation required. So it is fantastic that we across the House have agreed that we are going to make things smoother and easier for New Zealanders in applying for passports. Extending the term will be a popular move. We know it will be. That is why we on the Government Administration Committee recommended that the House look towards adopting this bill.
Tisch Lindsay: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6379. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Mojo Mathers—5 minutes.
Smith Stuart: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Stuart: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6378. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura): The Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) speaking as someone who has done a lot of business travelling is going to be a great thing. It will be great to be able to have a passport for 10 years. It is quite infuriating having just 3 or 4 years ago replaced my passport to then turn up in the US—I travelled through there quite frequently and to the UK—and have a biometric photograph and fingerprints taken. Every time you go through the US you line up and get all that and you wonder why on earth we have to have a passport renewed every 5 years. I understand the background as to why we went to a 5-year passport. However the rest of the world did not go along with us so it was time for a change.The previous speaker Clayton Mitchell stated just before that it would be good to have done this a few months ago as the people who have just renewed their passports would not have had to go through the process. But of course you would have to keep going back and back and there will always be people who renewed their passport the month before and would be quite annoyed about it. But that is just the nature of the beast.The ability to get a 10-year passport when their renewal comes up and also to do it at a much reduced cost over that 10-year period—$90-odd I believe—is a fantastic Christmas present for New Zealanders. I think it is a great thing for everyone and really it is good sense to get good law and good security and all the latest features that are going to be on these passports.Really security is so important around the world and we have to have the best travel documentation to ensure that we meet our security obligations around the world. It is not just ourselves we are looking after; it is the rest of the world. Someone alluded to the fact that our passport is the eighth most desirable passport in the world—that is something I learnt this evening—and we are ahead of the Australians on that. You can understand why.Hon David Cunliffe: What are you doing? Flogging them off? Auctioning them?STUART SMITH: No we are not auctioning them but we could auction off a few Opposition MPs although we would not get much for them I suspect. It is with great pleasure on that note seeing as we cannot get a bid for the Opposition MPs that I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.
Guy Nathan: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGuy Nathan: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6371. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries) on behalf of theMinister for Workplace Relations and Safety:I move That the Employment Standards Legislation Bill be reported to the House by 12 February 2016.Motion agreed to.
Dowie Sarah: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6367. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): Despite what the member opposite Phil Twyford had to say I think that this is a good bill and of course I rise in support of it. When the members opposite say that we do not take our role seriously I want to put on record that as a constituency MP I do. I know that members on this side of the House do and we will respond to an issue if it is raised with us.This is an agile Government that is going to respond in kind and put forward a bill that can be debated in the select committee and it may well be manoeuvred and malleable in parts but that is a good thing. We want to have that debate. With respect to zero-hour contracts anything that talks about prohibiting employers who do not commit to hours of work for employees and calls for prohibiting employers who cancel shifts without providing reasonable notice or who put unreasonable restrictions on employees with respect to secondary employment—those things are unreasonable. We agree with that and we want to take the time to debate it and make sure that zero-hour contracts are used appropriately and that flexibility is retained but that it is an appropriate mechanism of employment law.The other thing that I want to touch on briefly is of course paid parental leave. As a mother who has had two premature children—at 32 weeks and 36 weeks—I want to say that extending paid parental leave will be of benefit. I am pleased that both sides of the House agree with that. It is going to be a great help to those families who have premature babies including extending paid parental leave provisions to have keeping-in-touch days which I think for professionals and other women—or men for that reason—who take paid parental leave and who work will enable them to get into the workforce and keep in touch and not lose any confidence in respect of their profession.I think this is a good bill. I think that it will be well-received in the select committee. Of course we will have some robust debate but that is part of the process and I welcome that and support this bill.
Tisch Lindsay: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6366. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Phil Twyford—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6365. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Jan Logie—5 minutes.
Scott Alastair: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeScott Alastair: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6360. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): Well it is pleasing to hear the Opposition is in support of the bill at this stage but I do dispute the fact—or the assertion—that the National Government does nothing for families given that we have just increased benefits by $25 a week for families on benefits. We have got the under-13s with free medical health care and we have doubled the early childhood learning budget in the last Budget. As well of course we have had a very high worker participation rate forever—or since records have begun.This bill is in three parts and we will I am sure be debating and changing some of the details as we go through the process but this does allow for workers to reflect the modern workplace and the flexibility that is required by employees to participate in the workforce.The second part deals with the Employment Relations Act and it discourages and brings in higher penalties for those employers who are breaking the rules. Of course we have heard about the Wages Protection Act which deals with the zero-hour contracts—or contracts that allow people to be on standby if you like—and be compensated for that and that is the requirement in this bill. The requirement for that standby participation is that that employee is compensated. Of course reasonable notice must be given to employees if their shift has been changed or is cancelled. There are three parts and there will be three good debates going on and I commend this bill to the House.
Sage Eugenie: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSage Eugenie: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6350. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]EUGENIE SAGE (Green): I will be brief. The select committee process is fundamental to our lawmaking. It is the time when the public get an opportunity to have their say on the laws that this Parliament passes. If we have a truncated process there will be less time for submissions there will be less time for the public to actually present their submissions to the select committee and officials will be under strict deadlines in terms of reporting back. This is tax legislation. It is complex legislation. Having a truncated select committee process means less scrutiny by the public less scrutiny by officials and potentially bad law with more loopholes. That is why we are opposing a truncated process.
Borrows Chester: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6349. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call Phil Twyford.
McClay Todd: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcClay Todd: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6346. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TODD McCLAY (Minister of Revenue): I move That the Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill be reported to the House by 22 October 2015 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c). Our tax system relies on voluntary compliance with our tax rules. For the most part taxpayers do the right thing: pay their taxes and meet their tax obligations. The Inland Revenue Department works to help people understand and meet their obligations but there remain those who avoid those obligations. In such instances the Government will act to close off loopholes and help ensure greater fairness in the tax system.The measures introduced by this legislation apply to residential property that is acquired on or after 1 October 2015 and disposed of within 2 years. The brightline test proposed by this bill will work in conjunction with other measures introduced in this year’s Budget to improve tax compliance by property speculators. Along with the brightline test those measures are proposed to come into effect on 1 October of this year. This is what this bill is about and why I propose a shorter select committee period.
Scott Alastair: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeScott Alastair: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6345. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): Mr Twyford almost got through his speech without criticising foreigners which is quite surprising. But in the end he did. He said that he would not let foreign owners buy property unless they live here. We also had a similar comment from the Greens finance spokesperson Ms Genter who said that there was too much foreign capital in this country. And of course we have the New Zealand First “Professor” Mr Tabuteau who railed against foreign owners and said they are not required they are a bad thing and they should not be allowed.The same people forget that the New Zealand Superannuation Fund is a major investor in overseas assets and property. They forget that Fonterra invests overseas. They forget that Turners and Growers owns leases and controls huge tracts of land in Europe where it grows apples. They also forget Miraka. Mr Tabuteau’s colleagues could look up the directorships of Miraka and see that as well as Vietnamese names there is a good stamping of Wairarapa names across that board of directors. And what a good thing that is.The wine industry has foreign investment. The Premier Beehive bacon company in the Wairarapa is owned by the largest food group in the world. This is a good thing. Foreign investment is a good thing for New Zealand. It is a necessity for New Zealand and it must continue for the benefit of New Zealand. And houses are but one class of asset—one class of asset alongside the sharemarket alongside the bond market and alongside the housing market.This bill fine-tunes and reinforces the part of the Income Tax Act that already exists around land purchased with the intention of selling. This is a good bill. It captures speculators and it taxes them fairly. I commend it to the House.
Bayly Andrew: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBayly Andrew: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6342. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): It is a pleasure to be talking on the Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill. It is good to hear that the previous speaker Clare Curran as a member of the Opposition is supporting this bill which is a good thing because this bill is actually complementary to the other bill that we have been talking about tonight which is the Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill. What this really is is the second part of a package of measures to make sure that we are protecting the tax system that we have in New Zealand that everyone is paying their fair share of tax and in particular that investors in property assets are also paying their fair share of tax.Some people characterise this as a capital gains tax. It is not actually; it is actually an income tax and everyone has an obligation to pay tax. It is the same scenario if you are buying and selling shares on a regular basis—we have applied the same principle to those people who want to buy and sell houses on a regular basis. Essentially the brightline test requires tax to be paid on any gain from the sale of a residential property within a 2-year period. During the select committee stage we extended the definition of residential property to include serviced apartments and also vacant land when it is proposed that it be subdivided or when there is the intention to build a dwelling on it.As we have heard tonight there are three key exemptions: the first one is for the main home the second one is in relation to inherited property and the third one is when there is a sale as a result of a property settlement agreement—or in other words when there has been a divorce. Also I want to note that the exclusion also takes into account land used predominantly for business purposes or as farmland. We have been very careful about the definition of land that is used for business purposes so as to make sure that we come up with a pragmatic solution for that.The select committee also dealt carefully with the definition of what is regarded as a main home and we have introduced this new concept of “greatest connection”. This is particularly pertinent to owners of houses who have more than two houses and how we have applied those rules is really important in terms of this new definition or concept of “greatest connection”.I will say that the other side of this bill deals with making legitimate deductions and also deals with offsetting losses on the sale of property but we have put a caveat on that so that any such deductions or losses must meet the brightline test and secondly can be applied only to other such similar property arrangements when there has been a sale of land.I want to commend this bill to the House. I think it is a good bill and it is part of a good comprehensive package that we are putting in place.
Tisch Lindsay: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6340. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Dr Russel Norman—5 minutes.
Bennett David: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBennett David: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6330. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East): That member David Clark just put out new Labour Party policy in his speech. In that speech he said and these are the words that I want all New Zealanders to remember: “You can own a house in New Zealand only if you live here or build a new home.” Those are your exact words. You must—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order!DAVID BENNETT: The member said that New Zealanders must live here or build a new home. What about if somebody owns a home and then decides to go on their OE? Are they still allowed to own their home? Are they allowed to own their own home? If they go away for a weekend go away for a month go away for a year do they still have to own their own home? They have to sell their home under Labour Party policy. The Labour Party is forcing New Zealanders to sell their homes under its approach for this legislation.What happens if somebody goes overseas and works for 10 years in London? If a New Zealand - born person goes to a New Zealand school New Zealand university and all their family are here then goes overseas for 10 years under the Labour Party policy that person has not got the right to buy a house in New Zealand. Under Labour Party policy they do not have the right to buy a house in New Zealand—and that member David Clark is supposed to be Labour’s tax spokesperson! At the end that member spoke about the Australian policy which was “resident or new home”. It is not the same as “live here or new home”. So maybe if we got a decent tax spokesperson for the left we might actually get some reasonable policy coming out of that side. That was his first mistake and that was his worst mistake.But his second mistake was another beauty as well because that member said that holding land for speculative gain is not taxed in New Zealand under—[Interruption] Once you get through the 2 years that member said you are not going to be taxed. Well the 10-year rule has always been there. If you have the intention of purchasing a piece of property with the intention of sale it is taxable—and that member better leave the House now because he knows he has stuffed it up. The reality is that in tax policy in tax law in New Zealand if a person or resident or whatever buys and sells a property with the intention of selling it within 10 years that is taxable. All this legislation does is deem that within the 2-year period it is featuring within the brightline test and will be taxable for those purposes.The Opposition has put up great new policy today: members of this country citizens and residents must live here or build a new home. That is the only way that people can own a house in New Zealand and that is policy that I am sure the Labour Party will come to regret. I am sure the next speakers will try to adjust it in the way that they normally do—through rhetoric in this House.
Macindoe Tim: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6326. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (Senior Whip—National): I think the important thing to note here is the question has not yet been proposed. It is true that the Hon Hekia Parata did commence the speech on behalf of the Minister. McGee is very clear that a Minister must introduce a bill if he or she is responsible for it unless he or she is unable to do so. That was certainly the case the last time this bill was being considered but it had literally just commenced. The Minister in charge of the bill is now here. The question has not been proposed and I submit therefore that the Minister in charge of the bill must be the person who continues to move this particular part of the first reading.
Robertson Grant: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just in the context of this point of order I hope you will allow me to do this. I see that the Minister who began the speech is not in the House and I draw your attention to Standing Order 287 which says that “The member moving the bill’s first reading must on the commencement of that member’s speech—(a) nominate the select committee to consider the bill” and then talk about any special powers or instructions that are required. As I recall I was in the House when the Minister was about to do that and was I suspect in the middle of the referral motion. It was certainly one of those referral motions that have both a shortened time frame and also a request for the House to allow the committee to meet when the House is sitting and on Fridays and so on.I just wonder Mr Assistant Speaker—and I seek your guidance on—what happens when that Minister who is the person noted under Standing Order 287 is no longer here and whether or not that Minister has to complete it. Can another Minister complete it? I am unaware of whether this has happened before but it seems like a very unusual situation particularly when I am not even sure whether the Minister had completed her introduction of the bill.
Mallard Trevor: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): On the last occasion the House was considering this bill the Hon Hekia Parata was speaking on behalf of the Minister of Revenue and she has 9 minutes and 30 seconds remaining.
Macindoe Tim: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I thank members who have spoken in support of this sensible measure and I commend this bill to the House.
Scott Alastair: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeScott Alastair: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6323. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): What a shame that contribution from the previous speaker Phil Twyford. He is not interested in land information or offshore persons information; all that he is interested in is wanting to ban the Chinese. He talked about foreign owners and foreign investors but really he just meant the Chinese. He wants to pick on that group and to pick them out despite the fact that these people with Chinese-sounding names have been in the country for generations—they have been here since the gold rush.For him to speak as he has done is just a disgrace because this is about gathering facts not gathering hearsay evidence—not going to one real estate agent and gathering an opinion piece from one selected piece of data. This is about real information around who is buying property in New Zealand. There are two very simple requirements if you are an offshore person: an IRD number and a bank account. It is very simple with a home exemption. It is a very simple piece of legislation and I commend this bill to the House.
Borrows Chester: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6321. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Phil Twyford—a 5-minute call.
Borrows Chester: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6320. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call Eugenie Sage—a 5-minute call.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Refugee Quota—Syrian RefugeesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Refugee Quota—Syrian Refugees[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6308. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received letters from James Shaw and Andrew Little seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the announcement of a decision to accept an additional 600 Syrian refugees. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The business of the House should not be set aside just because an announcement has been made even though it may be important. There must be such an element of urgency that the matter must take precedence over other business. My perception is that there has been general support for the accepting of additional refugees. There has been and will continue to be discussion about whether the number of refugees accepted is sufficient. I am not persuaded that debating that issue warrants the setting aside of the business of the House. The application is therefore declined.