edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
2. Question No. 2—FinanceTIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 2—FinanceTIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki): Thank you Mr Speaker and can I wish you a happy Valentine's Day. I'm sure you were hoping to hear that from me.SPEAKER: We'll move now to question No. 3!TIM COSTLEY: Like so many women in my past.2. TIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has she seen on Government spending?Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): As I said yesterday I received Treasury's briefing to the incoming Minister (BIM) and it made for sober reading. It told me that core Crown expenses have increased markedly since 2017 peaking at 35 percent of GDP in the 2021-22 fiscal year which is the highest rate in New Zealand in decades.Tim Costley: What has been the change in core Crown revenue?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Treasury's BIM told me that in 2021-22 core Crown tax revenue was also the highest as a percentage of GDP for many years—not surprising as personal income tax rates and thresholds have not been adjusted for 14 long years.Tim Costley: What have these changes meant for the operating balance?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Government operating balance is the difference between what the Government receives each year and what it spends. Core Crown expenses are higher than core Crown revenue and have been rising faster meaning that the Government is in deficit. In fact the Government has been in deficit since 2019.Tim Costley: Is the Government deficit due to COVID?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: A good question. While temporary factors such as COVID and the North Island weather events have certainly contributed to the weak fiscal position much of the operating deficit is structural which means the Government would still be in deficit even if the economy was operating at its potential. In fact Treasury's BIM tells me that after stripping out large one-off expenditures like COVID and after adjusting for the economic cycle the Government is currently running a structural deficit of around 2 percent of GDP largely because of growth in Government spending. That is the mess Labour has left us in.
Garcia PauloPAULO GARCIA (National—New Lynn): I feel that I'm so ill-fit to delve into this debate with the—Arena Williams: Point of order Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker may I ask the member to yield his four minutes 45 to me to speak on this bill?ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Jenny Salesa): It's not actually a point of order Arena. But I will put the request to the member. Would you like to yield your time?PAULO GARCIA: No Madam Speaker.Rawiri Waititi: But you said you're unfit.PAULO GARCIA: Yes. If you will hear me out then we could go further. So when I say I'm ill-fit I'm ill-fit to wade into the amazing speeches of everyone doing battle about Māoridom and rights of Māori. I am essentially an outsider myself. I have come from the Philippines. When I stand here because I have already become a New Zealand citizen I view everybody as my brothers in New Zealand and I feel that everyone is a New Zealander in this House. I understand the passion. I understand the need to forward interests. But at the same time I am amazed at how divisive the debate has been going.What we have is a view that was as has been said raised already by former Labour MP Rino Tirikatene who I actually had great respect for at the time we coincided in the 52nd Parliament—now it's been brought again. That first bill was voted down after the second reading; now it is again here with us. It is truly striking that it was not brought when it could have fostered much further during the past three years when Labour had that capacity to get it through. It is brought out now when the politics and the debate about Māori rights is extremely hot and out there in everyone's attention. However I must say the bill seeks to entrench into the constitution matters that do not need to be entrenched. To be entrenched through a member's bill is not the way to do it. There are 300 clauses and only a handful are entrenched. This is not the process nor the time to bring out an attempt again. We believe therefore that entrenchment is really an unusual tool in legislation at this time especially so through this process. Also once constitutionally entrenched provisions like these would require a 75 percent majority in the House to make a change and if the intent is really to go through ensuring the entrenchment of the provisions that are sought then this process is not the appropriate process.This Government is focused on delivering on all the items all the statements that we have made. We are focused on delivering on the economy and making sure that law and order is back on track. This bill is not a priority and we do not support this bill.
Arbuckle JamieJAMIE ARBUCKLE (NZ First): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take this call on the Electoral (Equal Protection of Māori Seats) Amendment Bill. I must say preparing for this speech tonight one may be a little bit confused because in my hands here I have this bill which is the bill that we are debating tonight and in this hand I have another bill that only six years ago we were here with this one with a slightly different name.This bill seeks to amend provisions of the Electoral Act 1993 to provide Māori electorates with the same protection as general electorates. The provisions relating to the general electorates are currently entrenched but provisions relating to the Māori electorates are not. As I've already raised this bill is the rebirth of the electoral amendment bill sponsored by Rino Tirikatene of Labour called the Electoral (Entrenchment of Māori Seats) Amendment Bill. That bill was debated in 2018. So six years later here we are with the same bill that has had a name change to make it sound more palatable. That bill used the word entrench"; this bill replaces it with "equal protection" but everything else is the same.New Zealand First's position on the outright entrenchment of Māori seats is clear: we do not support temporarily empowered politicians like ourselves deciding what the constitution of Parliament should be. That is a decision that the people should make and the people should make that for a referendum. So to the member who has put this bill up that is actually New Zealand First's stance and a way forward for a future member's bill. In 2019 we advocated for a referendum on the matter as an Amendment Paper. And that was not supported across the House but had the opportunity to go to a referendum but was not supported. We are the party that believes in freedom we are the party that believes in democracy and we are the party that believes in equal citizenship.Now this is the rub. We've had this debate before. And if Labour was serious about this debate and the provisions in this bill they would have simply passed it using their parliamentary majority between 2020 and 2023. The opportunity was there you had the numbers and you couldn't convince enough other people in the House with those types of numbers—that is shameful.So a referendum from New Zealand First's point of view is the way forward on this bill. So we've been here; we've done it before. We've done that had the debate and New Zealand First will not support this bill. Thank you."
Stephenson ToddTODD STEPHENSON (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of ACT to speak on this bill. ACT will be opposing this member's bill the Electoral (Equal Protection of Māori Seats) Amendment Bill and I'd like to briefly set out why. Our vision for New Zealand is in keeping with our liberal democratic traditions and we're committed to universal human rights and growing ethnic diversity in a modern multicultural liberal democracy.I think it's worth noting that over 1.2 million New Zealanders were actually born overseas and so while we need to appreciate our history we also need to take into account our changing community. The Māori electorates were originally introduced as a temporary measure during the early days of our democracy and at this stage there's no need to make a change in an age where we are now a multicultural liberal nation with a Parliament that governs for all New Zealanders.ACT has consistently opposed race-based representation and believes this kind of identity politics has no place in the 20th century where there are many Kiwis with different ethnic breakdowns making up this country. Even if we exclude the members who represent Māori electorates Māori MPs are now overly represented in this House proving that Māori can be democratically elected to this House. We don't need to entrench these seats.Today we have MPs like James Meager who spoke earlier and the Minister who's here in the House tonight who have won general electorate seats. In fact we have 33 MPs of Māori descent in the 54th Parliament the most ever. Hon Willie Jackson: Yeah but are they all real Māoris though?TODD STEPHENSON: We have long believed in this concept of one person one vote as the foundation of democratic institutions worldwide.Hon Willie Jackson: Are they real Māoris?James Meager: Do they count?ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Jenny Salesa): Order!Hon Willie Jackson: We're just asking if they're real Māoris.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Jenny Salesa): Yes I hear you the Hon Willie Jackson but I do want to hear the speech. I know we don't always agree but we all have a chance to make a speech.TODD STEPHENSON: Thank you Madam Speaker. I appreciate that. We oppose the entrenching of the designated seats. Furthermore—and I think this has been spoken to by Mr Meager—when we're making changes to New Zealand's electoral law this needs to be done in a considered way and I don't think a member's bill is appropriate.In fact Minister Goldsmith on 16 January made some initial comments around the independent Electoral Commission and its final report and noted that the Government will make a formal response to the review in due course. That report contains over 140 recommendations and I think we need to think about those changes and ones like this and that broader context. So for that reason the fact that it is a member's bill we won't be supporting it.
Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) (Improving Mental Health Outcomes) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Brownlee GerryMAIDEN STATEMENTSSPEAKER: In accordance with the determination of the Business Committee we will now hear maiden speeches. I call on Hūhana Lyndon to make her maiden address to Parliament.
Upston LouiseAMENDED ANSWERS TO ORAL QUESTIONSQuestion No. 10 to MinisterHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment): Point of order. Thank you Madam Speaker. I seek leave to make a personal explanation to correct an answer to a supplementary question in question time today.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears not.Hon LOUISE UPSTON: In a supplementary answer to question 10 from Te Pāti Māori I answered that the number on jobseeker benefit has gone up by 76000. It is actually 69100.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): Thank you Minister Upston.
District Court (Protecting Judgment Debtors on Main Benefit) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Luxton CameronCAMERON LUXTON (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. On Friday of last week a 4-metre cavity was discovered on State Highway 29A in Tauranga. It seemed to have been caused by extensive leaking from a failing stormwater drain that went undetected for an extended period of time. This sinkhole in addition to other roadworks in the city led to the Tauranga City Council advising the Bay of Plenty population to stay off the roads and work from home. Not everyone can work from home. For our tradespeople our healthcare staff and many other workers who keep New Zealand going every day working from home simply is not an option.On Monday people who couldn't stay home experienced serious interruptions including businesses with employees unable to make appointments and therefore missing out on customers. Some children missed out on after-school activities. There has been a negative impact on the economy and this event has shown the importance of good roading infrastructure to the life of the Bay of Plenty.The leaking pipe which caused significant subsoil erosion was broken for an unknown period of time before being detected. The cavity formed under a small pothole on a busy freight route. I fear that if it had not been detected when it was and the whole 4 metres had opened up in say the middle of the night it could have caused a serious accident.Both local and central government have responsibility for the assets involved which demonstrates the importance of clear communication between councils and the New Zealand Transport Agency. The residents of Tauranga want answers about what happened: what checks were happening what monitoring procedures were in place and what allowed for this leak to go undetected for so long? We must know what went wrong in order to prevent issues like this from reoccurring.Closing down New Zealand's fifth largest city because of a hole caused by a broken pipe is embarrassing. Tauranga hosts our largest export port which is an essential link to the economy of the upper North Island. This Government is committed to investing in infrastructure including a sufficient roading network and council water assets through Local Water Done Well. We are a growing country and ACT understands that when you build more houses you need to build more infrastructure to support them which is why as part of the coalition agreement between National and ACT we will introduce financial incentives for councils to enable more housing including consideration of sharing a proportion of GST collected on new residential builds with local councils.The Western Bay of Plenty is one of the fastest growing regions of New Zealand and is expected to be the home of more than 250000 people by 2050. While previous Governments have put forward fantasy projects for Auckland and Wellington it is essential that we do not forget the regions and that we do not leave essential cities like Tauranga to put up with avoidable road closures on top of the worst congestion in the country. Thank you Mr Speaker.
Brownlee GerryPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: I neglected to mention before that Ministers have delivered papers. The Clerk will read those.CLERK: It's just your one. I don't have any.SPEAKER: Oh just the one is it? OK I do it. OK I present the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment entitled Estimate of Environmental Expenditure 2023-24: Method and results. That paper is published under the authority of the House.
Brownlee GerryPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: There have been no petitions delivered. Ministers have delivered papers.CLERK:2022-23 annual report for the New Zealand Conservation Authority2022-23 actuarial valuation of the Government Superannuation Fund AuthorityFinancial Statements of the Government of New Zealand for the year ended 30 June 2023.SPEAKER: There are no select committee reports. No bills have been introduced.
Brownlee GerryAPPOINTMENTSAssistant SpeakerSPEAKER: Members we're short of a presiding officer this week believe it or not. Having discussed it with the member I wish to seek leave for the Hon Jenny Salesa to be appointed an additional Assistant Speaker until 6 p.m. on Thursday 15 February despite Standing Order 29(1). Any objections? There is none. Congratulations Jenny.
Speaker's Ruling — Content of Answers
Visitors — Germany and Nepal—Parliamentary Delegations
Brownlee GerrySPEAKER'S RULINGSContent of AnswersSPEAKER: Members yesterday I indicated that I'd respond to a point of order from Ricardo Menéndez March. I want to affirm Speakers' ruling 205/5 Ministers should not commence an answer to a question with a political attack on the person asking a question." I'll watch for it in the future and members are always able to raise a point of order if they think this has occurred."
Brownlee GerryVISITORSGermany and Nepal—Parliamentary DelegationsSPEAKER: Members we have two delegations from other Parliaments here today. I'm sure members will want to welcome from the German Bundestag members of the German-Pacific Parliamentary Group led by Filiz Polat and the Hon Narayan Prakash Saud Minister of Foreign Affairs of Nepal and his accompanying delegation who are all present in the gallery.
Pugh MaureenWEDNESDAY 14 FEBRUARY 2024The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSMAUREEN PUGH (Assistant Speaker): Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom justice mercy and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Thursday 23 May 2024 - Volume 775
5. Question No. 5—HousingRIMA NAKHLE (National—Takanini) to the Minister of HousingQuestion No. 5—Housing5. RIMA NAKHLE (National—Takanini) to the Minister of Housing: What announcements has he made regarding social housing places?Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister of Housing): Last week I was proud to announce that Budget 2024 allocates $140 million to funding 1500 new social homes. This investment underlines the Government's commitment to housing New Zealanders in need in a fiscally sustainable way. We will be funding these places to community housing providers. They do an outstanding job housing people in need currently providing over 13000 social houses around New Zealand and they have the capability expertise and desire to grow further. We're committed to growing the social housing sector.Rima Nakhle: When will he prioritise these new social housing places?Shanan Halbert: 10 years' time.Hon CHRIS BISHOP: No in the next two years; you should listen up mate; I answered that last week. Currently social housing is procured from community housing providers on a project by project basis. What we have said is that around 500 new homes of the 1500 will be allocated quickly using the existing pipeline of community housing provider opportunities with three objectives in mind: firstly value for money from Government investment; secondly contributing towards our target of getting people out of emergency housing motels; and a balanced approach between achievability and building capability in historically underserved regions. In short this means we will be prioritising social housing places where it will make the biggest difference and get people out of motels.Rima Nakhle: What about the rest of the 1500 new places?Hon CHRIS BISHOP: The balance of the 1500 places which will be about a thousand will likely be allocated using an active-purchaser approach which officials will be developing throughout the rest of 2024. This is a concept developed in the independent review of Kāinga Ora and it refers to the Government developing a much more sophisticated understanding of current and future housing needs at a national regional and cohort level; taking a social-investment approach to improving housing outcome; and potentially outcome-based contracts. Subject to ministerial agreement officials will be looking at developing longer-term strategic partnerships with some community housing providers to achieve specific social and housing outcomes rather than looking at single proposals one by one.
Brownlee GerrySPEAKER: As this tribute to our late colleague comes to an end—our colleague Fa'anānā Efeso Collins—I hope his family and friends who are here today will appreciate that our collective grief is very much borne from his love for you his family and for all those that he served. May he rest in peace.
Acknowledgment of Death of a Member — Fa'anānā Efeso Collins
Kemp Takutai Tarsh; Kuriger BarbaraTAKUTAI TARSH KEMP (Te Pāti Māori—Tāmaki Makaurau): Tēnā koe e te Pīka tēnā tātou e te Whare. Amohia ake te ora o te iwi ka puta ki te whai ao—the health and wellbeing of our people is paramount and housing is paramount to the health and wellbeing of our people. So I'm going to kōrero all about what happens when a Government treats housing as a business instead of a social good.Housing was identified as a key long-term issue in several reports. Treasury's He Tirohanga Mokopuna 2021 talked about the ways in which housing is becoming increasingly unaffordable for first-home buyers with the median house price in my electorate Tāmaki Makaurau now being over $1 million way out of the price range of our whānau. Te Puni Kōkiri's Thriving Whānau in 2040 talked about the barriers Māori face when accessing finance to buy a home. The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development's briefing talked about a stark decrease in homeownership for Māori and Pasifika and the increase of kaumātua living in rental properties. But I want to talk about what this means for our people who are doing it tough day in day out pay cheque to pay cheque benefit to benefit. They live on Pōhara St".It means that tonight 100000 people in Aotearoa will be sleeping rough on streets in tents in cars in garages or in unliveable houses that are making them sick. It means that 30000 tamariki will be hospitalised this year because of substandard housing. This housing crisis is literally killing our tamariki and mokopuna. There are currently 94000 unoccupied houses in this country doing nothing but collecting dust. That is enough empty houses to put roofs over the heads of every single person who's experiencing homelessness in Aotearoa right now yet in Aotearoa we're happy to allow tamariki to sleep in cars. This is what happens when you treat housing as a commodity and a business instead of as a human right. Māori make up 60 percent of homelessness in Aotearoa. Nothing paints a clearer picture of colonisation for indigenous people being homeless in their homeland.While this Government is cutting minimum increases and sanctioning beneficiaries rent and food prices are higher than ever. Our people are being forced to pay over half their income to feed their landlord's whānau when they can barely afford to feed their own and just yesterday this Government confirmed it will be scrapping first-home grants further locking Māori Pasifika and rangatahi out of homeownership. This would save the Crown $245 million over four years which is about 8 percent of the $3 billion handout they're giving to landlords. This Government is making homeownership—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you to the member. I'm really sorry but we have run out of time for this debate.Motion agreed to."
Special Debates — Debate on Long-term Issues—Long-term Insights Briefings
Kuriger BarbaraSPECIAL DEBATESDebate on Long-term Issues—Long-term Insights BriefingsDEPUTY SPEAKER: Members we now come to the debate on long-term issues informed by select committee reports on long-term insights briefings. And just before I call on the chairperson of the Governance and Administration Committee to move that the House take note of long-term trends risks and opportunities affecting New Zealand I just want to say that the purpose of this debate is to be future focused and provide an opportunity for members to reflect on the long-term challenges and opportunities that face New Zealand. As such it would be desirable for select committee chairs in setting the scene for the debate to be non-political in their contributions.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That debate on this question now close.Ayes 68New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.Noes 55New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 6.Motion agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the Local Government (Electoral Legislation and Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill be reported to the House by 21 June 2024 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 on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 193 195 and 196.Ayes 68New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.Noes 55New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 6.Motion agreed to.
Local Government (Electoral Legislation and Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Justice Committee
White HelenHELEN WHITE (Labour—Mt Albert): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's good to go just straight after my colleague Shanan Halbert because I want to talk about Auckland. We have a super-city. It's a very big structure and we've just been through the long-term plan in Auckland. It's been an incredibly stressful time and all hands have been on deck. We would now be going into a period when all the ramifications of those decisions were being considered. But now we're going to have this happen when there will also be implications from the Budget coming at our counsellors and those that really really need to engage on such an important issue in Auckland.One of the issues with the super-city is that it can be seen as sometimes more cumbersome rather than less because it has to reach out into quite distinct local communities and it is very very important—Cameron Brewer: Auckland's already said no.HELEN WHITE: I'd just take the point my friend across the House has just suggested which is that Auckland said no. I think that's neither here nor there in this situation because Auckland is a huge part of New Zealand with a lot of people in it and they don't all say no Cameron Brewer. They don't all say it. It isn't a case of one voice being the Auckland voice; in fact I would say that is a really dangerous thought—that we're talking about one voice dominating everything and it being seen as something that is dominated by a single unitary voice. In fact I am talking about the opposite of that Mr Brewer. I am talking about the need for Aucklanders with nuanced intelligent voices and with different thoughts to have a say.It was pointed out to me that we changed the law to allow up to 30 Auckland councillors to enable a Māori ward—OK?—and there are some very proud people on the other side of this House in regard to that decision. So I would like more time in the process to allow people to engage in a meaningful way in a process that is so important to them and to Aucklanders. I would like to hear some of those voices and we won't be hearing that many regardless of the time but we will definitely be hearing a deeper and richer communication from Auckland on this issue. Thank you Madam Speaker.
Halbert ShananSHANAN HALBERT (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. If I remember correctly in speaking in response to both Andy Foster and the point at hand the Māori Affairs Committee that heard the legislation originally—when we went through the process of submissions there were thousands and thousands of submissions over that particular period. What that meant was that at a practical level we did have to split into a number of groups. We did have to consider the amount of time that we gave to oral submissions.In this particular instance the proposed time frame from the Government would actually mean decisions for practical reasons would have to be made that submitters weren't able to be heard they wouldn't be able to hear everyone in this sense and/or they would decide on a time frame which wouldn't give people adequate time—i.e. five minutes for a submitter may or may not be enough time given the sensitivity of the subject at hand giving the tikanga the consideration that might apply. We know for example when Māori come to present in an oral submission format there is time required to allow for mihimihi in that sort of context. If we only allowed people to speak for that short period—five and/or 10 minutes—it actually at a practical level doesn't allow people to submit in an appropriate way.The second part in speaking to Andy Foster's point is that the interest of allowing quality submissions actually saves time in the long run—if people have a good amount of time to be able to prepare their submission in the first place rather than having to rush it. For the type of organisation like councils they have to do a lot of work in the background to build their submissions. If their submissions are better and therefore are in a better state that improves our ability as members considering the submissions in front of us to then be able to prepare our questions. So it's actually a lot more productive and punchier to address the overall concerns issues raised in those particular submissions.I do think it's too short I don't think it allows for appropriate tikanga to be respected in the oral submission process and I'm raising my concerns on that.
Foster AndyANDY FOSTER (NZ First): Look two things to say. One is again as I've said I've been through rather a lot of the council's representation reviews and I think that what is not being recognised on the other side is that it's not just our time frame that's got to be considered but the councils' collective time frames as well. They've got to go through and do a proper representation review and the problem that we had with the 2021 changes was actually that that process was not allowed for because there was not enough time allowed for it. So the introduction of the Māori wards never went through the process that would normally happen with a normal representation review. I know that the time frame is a short time frame but my encouragement for you is to allow that to happen so that the councils then have a decent amount of time to engage with their communities and to do that twice and do it properly. I mean so that this legislation and the out-workings of this legislation will get worked through thoroughly by the councils and I think that that is the thing to consider.The other point I'd like to make is just in response to my former colleague and fellow ex-mayor Celia Wade-Brown. I think she's quite right: this bill has two entirely separate components and you could consider that one of them needs to be dealt with in time to make sure it happens for the representation review process. The other one which is the postal bit only needs to take place in time to allow it to take effect for the 2025 election; in fact they're on different trajectories in terms of time frame. So that is something that could be thought through.But with what we have in front of us I think we just need to get on with the job. As Barbara Edmonds has said we can get it out the door today and give the maximum possible time for our communities to respond to this bill.
Edmonds BarbaraHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana): Thank you Mr Speaker. I've just been sitting in the House listening to the debate in relation to this referral motion. And I too want to support this side of the House in relation to the truncated time frames for the select committee process for this bill.The concern I have is actually quite practical. There's only a four-week period so therefore if the bill goes through tonight it gets sent to the select committee and the chairman can ask for submissions tomorrow. To give the community an opportunity to actually be able to submit on this you would at least look at around a five- possibly 10-working-day submission period. So that's two weeks gone. And then therefore in that two-week period which is also during a very very busy time for Parliament officials would need to brief the committee. If the committee requires to they may need to actually appoint an independent adviser given that this particular bill removes a constitutional arrangement that had already gone through a select committee process and the House in a previous bill. So that in itself has to happen within the two weeks.Then they would have to hear submissions. And given we have seen as other members have talked to around there being a number of people that are opposing it and have actually said that they will want to submit on this which is 50 mayors and a whole number of other people supporting it—those hearings of submissions may take two to three days which again impinges on the time for members of this side of the House to be able to actually hear submissions consider them. And then they possibly will be left with maybe a week or around six working days for there to be a draft report a revised tracked version of the bill drafting instructions and then the actual draft legislation for the committee to deliberate on and then seek basically amendments for.I really don't believe the four-week period is justifiable on the condition that because there is an election next year; surely more than four weeks can be spent on the select committee. Even if it was four months which is still a debatable referral it's still truncated it's not the six months which is the usual but it still would allow for proper time to consider submissions proper time for drafting. It even would allow this side of the House to draft their own Amendment Papers because I wouldn't be surprised if the other side of the House brought it through the committee of the whole House pretty quickly. But actually it's quite an important process—a practical decision that you are truncating a process for select committee which is on an important bill which we believe on this side of the House that members of the public should be able to have time to submit time for members to consider it and therefore to allow time for drafting. Instead for something that is an election next year towards the latter part of next year I believe that at least four months would be a reasonable consideration. It would again not have to impinge on scrutiny week and just allows a bit more time for submitters who deserve to be heard on this. Thank you Mr Speaker.
Wade-Brown CeliaCELIA WADE-BROWN (Green): Thank you Mr Speaker. I also rise to question the timing. I think it's far too short given that even with this rush we've already had over 50 mayors sign a letter saying they don't agree. I imagine that many of those councils and Local Government New Zealand let alone iwi hapū and others will want to speak. I also think it's unfortunate that we have heard very little about the sensible half of the bill which is talking about a longer period for postal delivery and a longer period in advance of the election. I think it would be thoughtful whether it's through the Minister or through whichever select committee it goes to—which has been decided I understand—to consider dividing this bill into two halves. It is a marriage of two completely different issues one on which I imagine we would have unanimity in the House and one on which we have not. So I urge people who know the legislative process to see if we can make that divorce of two halves.
Williams ArenaARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Thank you Mr Speaker. Foreshadowing for the House that Labour MPs would propose that this Local Government (Electoral Legislation and Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill should be referred to the Māori Affairs Committee to consider the bill. I'm raising this with the House because the Justice Committee is the wrong committee to consider this. The Māori Affairs Committee has in the previous Parliament considered the original bill which amended the legislation to remove the barrier for locally elected councils to make a decision about the way that they conduct their representation inquiries and to decide on Māori ward representative structures. And so—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Just to support the member it's already been referred to the Justice Committee so that decision's gone and we're talking about this motion which is around that time frame around 21 June.
Henare PeeniHon PEENI HENARE (Labour): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. I stand to speak to this motion and continue to insist that the voice on this side of the House be heard with respect to a truncated time frame. I take the Minister's point that next year is the local body election. He didn't seem to expand any further on exactly why that particular date has been chosen only giving ourselves one month instead of what would normally be a six-month process. I get six months might take us—well it will take us—closer to October and of course if the local body election next year is in October then of course I can understand that. But that still allows perhaps a little bit more flex if you will in the time afforded to the select committee to undertake such an important piece of work.The other challenge that I put to the Minister is that in the four and a bit weeks that have been afforded to this particular process there is a long weekend and for members there is a scrutiny week; I must ask the question: will the committee and will the membership of that committee have enough time to be able to make sure that they can give this bill the due recognition and also the public the opportunity to find their voice on this very important matter?Mr Speaker you've heard in the House this evening just how passionate the House is about this matter and we should be; local democracy and democracy is an important thing to continue for us to uphold and make sure that voices are heard on this matter. Which is why Mr Speaker I want to express to you and to the House here this afternoon my concerns around a truncated time frame without seemingly a far more clearer rationale for each and every one of us specific to the time frame of the local body elections which are scheduled for next year. And once again I raise that in the next four weeks we've got Budget week we've got a long weekend and we also have a scrutiny week which is calling upon the time not just of this House but of officials that are required to support this process. I'm sure like the rest of the country—and I know my whānau right across the country are looking forward to Budget week; they want to sit down and interrogate it. We're asking them now to consider another important piece of legislation in a truncated time frame and we want to express our concern for that particular matter.
Watts Simon; Tuiono TeanauInstruction to Justice CommitteeHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Climate Change) on behalf of the Minister of Local Government: I move That the Local Government (Electoral Legislation and Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill be reported to the House by 21 June 2024 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 on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 193 195 and 196.I acknowledge that this bill is proceeding at pace. However this bill must be passed and proceed quickly so that the changes can apply for the 2025 local elections so that councils and communities can decide on whether they want to hold a poll in 2025 and will have certainty about ensuring that that will happen and so that election service providers can start preparing for the new local electoral time frames and communicate these to their local authorities.Despite the speed at which the bill needs to be passed the Government values hearing from all New Zealanders about the proposed changes. That is why we are proposing that the select committee process takes place but given the circumstances I respectfully ask the Justice Committee to consider the bill thoroughly and report back to the House by 19 June. Giving the committee additional authority to meet outside the usual hours will support it to meet this time frame and I invite the House to support this motion.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): The question is that the motion be agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Local Government (Electoral Legislation and Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 68New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.Noes 55New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 6.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.A party vote was called for on the question That the Local Government (Electoral Legislation and Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill be considered by the Justice Committee.Ayes 68New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.Noes 55New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 6.Motion agreed to.Bill referred to the Justice Committee.
Local Government (Electoral Legislation and Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Rutherford TomTOM RUTHERFORD (National—Bay of Plenty): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise to stand in support of the Local Government (Electoral Legislation and Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill. The bill will restore the ability for communities to have a direct influence on the establishment of Māori wards and Māori constituencies by restoring the ability for 5 percent of councils' electors to call for a binding poll on Māori wards - establishment decisions.Restoring the right to local referendums on Māori wards is a commitment under both the ACT and New Zealand First coalition agreements. Let me be clear: this should not come as a shock to anyone. All three parties campaigned on reversing the previous Labour Government's changes to local electoral law and today we are delivering on that commitment. Local communities should be given the opportunity to have a say on their own representation. Referendums on Māori wards allow local voters to make their own representation decisions. This bill is simply about restoring democracy to local communities. One local councillor from the Bay of Plenty got in touch with me after our Government announced that we were bringing this bill to the House and they said to me—and I quote—I am grateful that the Government is taking a stand on behalf of local government. New Zealand is a democracy and to have councils introducing Māori wards without consulting our communities is so wrong." Today we are restoring democracy to local communities. I commend this bill to the House."
Brewer CameronCAMERON BREWER (National—Upper Harbour): What a great day for community say. As we say in local government have your say. This gives all Kiwis the potential to have their say. There was a comment that Māori voice would be deprived at the council table or in local government. Well in my experience in local government local government is the best example of Māori relationships of engagement of enactment of enablement. So they have nothing to fear about losing voice in local government because local government I would argue are at best practice with local Māori relationships.So this is all about putting local" into local government as other speakers have said. This is about not just putting it through a 17-day process as the last Government did in 2021—17-day process in 2021 rushed through without any consultation. This puts an opportunity out there.Guess what they might be surprised—they might be surprised. Because I know they've been throwing it out to middle New Zealand—an insinuation that perhaps the hurdle was insurmountable which is an insinuation for the rest of middle New Zealand ratepayer New Zealand as somewhat conservative and potentially racist. Well guess what? Those are the same people that voted for MMP and that was a referendum wasn't it? They were the same people that voted for euthanasia and that wasn't a conservative issue. They are the same voters that voted in and around cannabis for recreational use at referendum and that nearly got through. So they might be surprised with just how New Zealanders view this if they are petitioned and if it gets to that far. So Māori have nothing to fear. This is about returning to the community the ability to have their say and local government does it better than anyone. So I have every confidence that this will end up in a very good place. It's going to go through a submission process. We will listen on the Justice Committee and make amendments accordingly. But it is a great day for community—have your say."
Costley TimTIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki): This bill should be neither a surprise nor a threat. I just want to pick up on those two points. Firstly it's not a surprise. All three Government parties campaigned on this leading up to the last election and were voted in accordingly—in quite a contrast perhaps to 2021 where we saw the first changes to representation and Māori wards not campaigned on at all in 2020. This is the fundamental tenet of democracy: that we tell people what we're going to do they vote for us and now we're doing it. You've seen that from this Government over successive months and with successive bills and this is another step in that direction. In fact it is a return to where it used to be for Māori wards not something new. This is just another example of our Government fixing more mistakes from the last Government fixing this attitude that Wellington knows best—We couldn't possibly trust our local communities to make these decisions for themselves!" That's why this is not a threat; it is giving the local community their chance to choose how they are represented. In my electorate of Ōtaki in both the Horowhenua and Kāpiti councils Māori councillors fill general ward seats at a higher rate than the general population. They are already represented. Moving them from a general seat to a Māori ward doesn't change their impact around the council table.Now to me it doesn't matter how they do it. The local community should be able to choose. The fundamental point is that this is about democracy. It's about letting the community stay in the driving seat. This actually isn't about Māori wards and someone trying to diminish Māori having their say or Pākehā having their say; this is about letting the community decide how they will be represented. In our community they already are represented. But across the country let's let Kiwis decide. Let's let the decisions be made at the lowest possible level. Let's restore democracy. I commend this bill to the House."
Luxton CameronCAMERON LUXTON (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. ACT campaigned against Labour's Māori wards regime and voters put us in Government with the expectation that we will keep our promises. With the restoration of local referendums enshrined in our coalition agreement we are keeping that promise.The aforementioned group of activist mayors that are going against what the community want because they are afraid of the community which they represent having a say in case they go against what they want are on a highway to nothing. ACT says that all New Zealanders are alike in dignity and this should be reflected in our institutions. With Māori wards legislation set to pass first reading we're celebrating a step towards a democracy that recognises our common humanity and does not treat you differently based on who your ancestors were.This bill gives effect to the coalition Government's commitment to restore the right to a local referendum on the establishment or ongoing use of Māori wards. The fact is that Māori have been doing a fantastic job at local government level at being elected: 13.5 percent of local government representatives are Māori. This is very close to the share of Māori in the general population but it goes further. This Government for many years has been passing Treaty settlement bills and this has been creating post-settlement entities which have got entrenched rights to be consulted within local government.The change which the Government is bringing with the strength of a democratic election behind it sees Kiwis as individuals. In a democracy we never say that the will of the people—as we heard tonight from the Green member in question time—is an insurmountable obstacle to democracy. Thank you Mr Speaker.