edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Luxton JoJO LUXTON (Labour): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm really pleased to rise and take a call on this the Earthquake Commission Amendment Bill. I think it's probably fair to say that the people of the South Island particularly in the Christchurch area have been—some of them especially—to hell and back in the last eight years at least and I can only imagine or begin to imagine the stress that they have been under when making their claims for their earthquake damage.As my colleague Duncan Webb said before the amendments that are going to be made to this piece of legislation are going to ensure that—he says—when this happens again it will enable these things to be acted on or managed more quickly. I really do pray that that doesn't actually happen any time soon but I think it's really important that people will be able to know that their claims and worries will be able to be dealt with in a much more timely manner given this piece of legislation. Obviously there's going to be a far larger review under way but what these particular changes do is make some immediate amendments that will ensure that things can happen in a far quicker and more managed way and I think that that is very important particularly for people who have been through this issue before.One thing I would like to talk about is removing the contents cover. Now we know that your personal belongings are very personal very precious and very special but I think the priority has to be around ensuring that there is the money available to fix people's homes and dwellings because people need those. They're essential—we need to have homes and dwellings to live in. Our contents although precious can at some point be replaced.I don't want to hold up the House any longer. Everyone that has spoken before me has pretty much said all that needed to be said so without further ado I wish to commend this bill to the House.
Scott AlastairALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I too have pleasure in supporting this bill in the second reading the Earthquake Commission Amendment Bill.I'd like to kick off by acknowledging all the work that the Earthquake Commission (EQC) have done in the past since the Christchurch earthquakes. The last speaker mentioned 470000 claims—a huge amount of work a huge amount of resource that had to go into the process of dealing with these claims and as noted previously many of these claims were claims regarding contents. As we've heard this amendment bill will exclude contents from the EQC's liability if you like or obligation. That burden will fall on the private sector and the residents will pay their premiums through the private sector with regard to their contents. That's OK. That's a good thing. It makes the EQC focus on what it's good at. If we look at the number of buildings the number of claims for buildings as I understand it was 167000. So we can see a huge number of those claims were regarding contents which will no longer be the case.We've also touched on the cap increasing from $100000 to $150000 plus GST and that has not been adjusted since 1993-94 but looking at the CPI index as I was coming in this afternoon the real number should really be around $160000 if you allow for inflation. So it hasn't really changed. The number hasn't really risen and I wonder whether the Finance and Expenditure Committee gave some thought to the fact that inflation will continue and the number $150000 will continue to be eroded in real terms. So we've seen no real increase in the cap but we have seen a decrease in the obligations that the EQC has to the public of New Zealand vis-à-vis the removal of contents. I just thought I'd point that out.The other change has been the time for claiming increasing from 30 days up to two years and even beyond in certain circumstances. But as has been noted that flexibility is there to give flexibility for people in unusual circumstances. As has already been noted most people—99 percent of people I think was mentioned—claim within the three months and for good reason: for certainty to enable their claim to be real to be justified and to be credible to the insurer. So while most will continue to claim within that 30 days to three months let's say it is a good thing that that period of time has been given to allow for some flexibility. I take on board what the Minister has said that that uncertainty really makes very little if any difference to the reinsurance market—the cost of reinsuring these claims that might be over say three months.So it is a very good bill because it enables the processes that the EQC is obliged to participate in to be much more efficient and effective and to be much leaner and meaner if you like and much less of a burden on the taxpayer and the administration of the EQC. For that reason I commend it to the House.
Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill — First Reading
King MattMATT KING (National—Northland): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. Look I'd like to talk about—in relation to this bill—this levy that pays the bills. Being a former volunteer firefighter myself only for two years—I can only claim two years—I'd like to acknowledge—Marja Lubeck: 11?MATT KING: Oh yeah OK. A couple of guys over there have done a bit more than me. I'd like to acknowledge the volunteers. I went to an award ceremony for a guy called Luers Crump from Kaikohe and he was getting his 50-year medal for service to the Fire Service. So he'd been supporting the community as a volunteer firefighter for the same amount of time that I've been on this earth. Another guy Richard Penney—25 years—a guy of similar age to me or maybe a bit younger; I don't want to offend him. He got his 25-year medal. And then another guy Jack Winwood from my local brigade whose done 50 years not continuous. He's probably done about 60 but it was broken up so he got his 50-year medal a while back too.So I'd like to acknowledge those volunteer firemen and the communities that they serve in my little patch up North. They do a great job. They get called out in the middle of the night all the time. I had the pager on me for two years and it drove me nuts so I acknowledge the work they do. They attend all manner of accidents and structure fires and that sort of thing. So the levy will be paying for this.I remember the day I first rolled up to training and I got given all this expensive firefighting gear and breathing apparatus to try on and all the kit. I had no idea what to do. I was a junior in the Ōkaihau Fire Brigade with a whole lot of very experienced people around me including my neighbour who's been the chief there for a few years and does great work. I recall going down to training in Christchurch. It's invaluable training. It's lifesaving sort of training. One thing you don't want to be if you're a volunteer fireman is scared of heights and you don't want to be scared of confined spaces. I tell you what that's what I'm scared of—heights and confined spaces.So we had to climb up the ladder at this training facility in Christchurch. It was two or three storeys up. As you can imagine I was very scared. They ask you a question at the top to try and clear your head and I couldn't answer anything. I couldn't even speak. I was so scared. But I got over it. I managed it. I fought the battle. DEPUTY SPEAKER: It's a really interesting story but it has absolutely nothing to do with the bill.MATT KING: OK. I'll finish up with one short story one tiny story: structure fire—my first structure fire. I went there with all these volunteer firemen and fought a huge structure fire for six hours until I was exhausted with all these amazing men and women around me in the middle of the night. The next day I was called out to investigate the cause of that fire because I was an investigator and what had happened was this young fella had gone into a shed at the back of the building and was sniffing petrol using a lighter as a torch. So that's what caused the fire. So anyway I commend this bill to the House.
McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): It's a privilege to take a call on this bill and I agree with all the nice things that have been said about the fire service and all those people that give their time voluntarily and all that sort of stuff in the name of supporting our communities. It's a fantastic organisation. However I have some interesting issues—Hon Members: However"?IAN McKELVIE: Well first of all we are supporting this bill to the select committee. But having come from a long period of experience in the insurance industry and I think some 15 years on various insurance boards and being an ex-mayor who's watched this very difficult topic raised with councils as well my view on the bill is slightly different and I think there's room for some discussion on it in the future because it is extremely difficult to levy insurance companies when people don't insure things. I guess the challenge I've got with this is that's going to become more and more prevalent as it gets more and more difficult to get insurance and I think we're going to have half of our community in due course not insured. We're seeing that already with earthquake insurance. We're going to see it more and more frequently with other forms of insurance. So I think the difficulty in the future is going to be—not in my time and I'm not going to die in a ditch over this but I have had significant experience in the insurance industry and I understand the challenges that this bill creates. My view is that it should be applied to rates but that's certainly not National Party policy—that's my personal view. So I think that there are some challenges in the course of this bill and it will be very interesting to see where we get to in the course of the select committee discussions on it. It is an important issue for our community. It is an important issue for all—particularly those in rural New Zealand interestingly because we are more isolated more fraught and have more challenges with some of this stuff. The other thing I'm concerned about with respect to this bill is the manner in which it's being applied and the manner in which the fire and emergency services have been reformed in my view is going to lead to significant increases in cost and I would be a little nervous as to where the costs might get to in the course of this levy situation. So I think there's a couple of things that I find interesting with it and find quite concerning and I'm sure it's an issue that the select committee will need to get its head round in the course of considering the discussion on the bill. So whilst I absolutely support the fire service—or Fire and Emergency New Zealand as it's now known—and all the activities they undertake I do think there are some challenges in the way we set these levies. I do think there are some challenges in the potential future costs particularly to those people who are paying the levy—in other words the people of New Zealand who are insured. So I've got a great deal of pleasure in supporting this bill to the next stage and I look forward to the discussion in the select committee on it."
Lubeck MarjaMARJA LUBECK (Labour): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. It's a real pleasure to take a call on this first reading of the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill. Before I get into this bill and the details of it I'd like to congratulate my colleague Mark Patterson on his promotion to chief whip. Mark is an absolute top bloke and I know he'll do a great job in keeping his team whipped and in check.Hon Members: Acting.MARJA LUBECK: Acting. This bill amends the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 the FENZ Act. All the bill's amendments are all levy-related to fund FENZ. As we have already heard rural and urban fire services were unified across the country into a national organisation Fire and Emergency New Zealand—FENZ—in July 2017. I also would like to acknowledge that fire service organisations have kept our communities across New Zealand safe for more than 150 years.In fact many of us MPs would have learnt firsthand during the International Firefighters Day on 4 May this year that increasingly these people not only do things like putting out fires and helping rescue people and animals but deal with issues such as road accidents medical accidents slips floods—you name it they're doing this. That's a workforce of 14000 and as we've heard 11000 volunteers dedicating their time and their families' time to play a critical role in keeping our communities safe.Minister Nash previously mentioned these organisations as the backbone of our communities and he mentioned a particular station at the top of his electorate. I too would like to do the same thing. In Leigh right at the top of Rodney is the Leigh fire station with an incredible volunteer group that is keeping our community safe.So at the time that the urban and rural fire services were unified there was a transitional levy regime established and the planning was—as we've heard—that this new levy would take place from 1 July 2019 but obviously this particular date is not achievable. So what this bill does again is it amends the commencement date for this new levy-based system. As we have already heard from Minister Martin that is because insurers and brokers will need more time to make considerable changes to their particular systems but we also want to have more information to understand what FENZ's costs are before we are setting any new levy rates to fund it.So again this is a very short bill. Apart from extending the transitional levy rates for FENZ and delaying the commencement date for the new levy regime the bill also deals with levy exemptions and they have already been mentioned so I won't repeat those. Lastly the bill also makes some amendments to clarify that levy rates can be for periods shorter than three years.So all in all it's a very sensible practical bill. Thank you Minister Martin and I commend it to the House.
Bayly Andrew; Williams PotoANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure to be talking on the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill. I've got to say that it's a lovely night isn't it Madam Deputy Speaker? This is one of these rare occasions when this House comes together. It's a beautiful thing and I know what the common denominator is—that is this is a good National Party bill and everyone's coming together over it.I've got to just acknowledge all the members of the Government and thank them for supporting our bill. Of course it's a pretty simple amendment this bill which is about pushing out the levy. I think many people have canvassed what it's about because basically it's giving a bit more time for the insurers and the brokers to put in place the right arrangements before they impose the levy. The other aspects are that we're going to exclude galleries and those types of entities from paying a levy which in my view I think is very good.I've got to say that like the rest of us before I just want to acknowledge the fine people the men and women of the Fire and Emergency New Zealand but also more importantly in many ways their families—their families who have to watch their loved ones go out late at night early in the morning or even during work. They down tools—and they might be self-employed—and go out to sometimes some quite horrific occasions. It's not only the accidents that the previous members spoke about but also the fires and also just those small things in the community that help. To me they are the heart of the small communities of New Zealand.In my electorate of Hunua I've got 15 of these fire brigades. Only just the weekend before last I was up in a beautiful part of my electorate called Āwhitu at Pollok celebrating the Āwhitu fire brigade annual medal awards. Of course many of them were receiving them and I always make a point of going there if I can to these medal awards because in my view they deserve it—much like the police. They do a fabulous job on our behalf.I can only just commend this bill. I think it's an excellent bill and I think it's just some tiny recognition of the wonderful thing that these men and women do on our behalf in our communities. Thank you very much.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): We now have a split call.
Dean JacquiHon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. National is pleased to support this bill through to select committee. I do have a question already.Hon Nathan Guy: Oh that'll be a goody.Hon JACQUI DEAN: Yeah well. The Minister very well set out the provisions in the bill and the necessity to extend the date out by three or maybe two years. The question I have—and it's something we will explore in the select committee process and when we come to the committee of the whole House—is: has the Government thought about the impacts on the insurance contract law reform work that is being undertaken by the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs at the moment? I don't know but that was a piece of work which was generated under our Government and should be bringing some improvements into insurance contract law in New Zealand and I do wonder whether that has been taken into account by officials. So that is something that absolutely the National Party will be looking out for when we open for submissions on this bill at the select committee. But we do support it.The commencement date 1 July 2019 is—what?—seven months away now. The Government have had a year—yes the Government had a year—and here we are some months out from the commencement date and suddenly they realise that that date is not achievable. And that's fine. We support the bill and we support pushing out the date of commencement because Fire and Emergency New Zealand has our support. From every little corner of New Zealand Fire and Emergency New Zealand turn out on weekends and at midnight and in the middle of family celebrations and weddings and funerals; they turn out for us and so we of course will support them in the passage of this bill which really pushes out—it's not a big bill—the commencement date by three or two years.So there's not much to say because I think apart from the matter I raised initially around does this work interface well enough with insurance law reform work"—and I think that is a critical question and consideration and I do look forward to contributions from the Government side of the House. That aside—and we will look carefully at that—we do support this. Of course we support Fire and Emergency New Zealand and doing all we can—after all it was this Opposition's legislation initially—to bring this bill through with amendment if need be but we do look forward to supporting it through to select committee."
Tinetti JanJAN TINETTI (Labour): As a member of this Parliament who has not sat on the Justice Committee who went through this—Hon Ruth Dyson: Bet you wish you were now.JAN TINETTI: I do wish I had been on that select committee when I read this bill. I have to commend that select committee for the work that they have done and also the Minister. The reason I say that is that I don't think this bill is like either steamed fish or old chips. I really believe this is a very very good bill—I don't like either of those things—I think it's a really good bill. The reason I say that is because I think that a test of a bill is if someone like me that has not sat on that select committee and actually understands it the essence of it—having read it today I actually think this is incredible the work that this particular select committee has done. I commend all of the members on that committee.The fact that this bill will improve people's experiences with courts and tribunals is absolutely critical to the ongoing work of the court system in this country. Most importantly the reduction of time that it will take to resolve matters in the courts and the tribunals and for people to feel safer in those situations is just a wonderful wonderful addition that this bill is actually making.The one area that I actually read through that I was most intrigued with was the work that the select committee did around the Human Rights Review Tribunal and the fact that they have taken on the Minister's paper—the recommendations that he took to Cabinet—to actually make that work now go through a lot quicker. We had such a backlog in that particular area that it was quite worrying because that is an area that is critical for many many people. We've heard those arguments here tonight and I don't need to re-go over those at all. So I'm really delighted with this particular bill and I commend it to the House.Bills read a third time.
Courts Matters Bill & Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill — Third Readings
Barry MaggieHon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. I rise to speak in brief to the third reading of this Courts Matters Bill. I've spoken at the previous readings and don't intend to take up too much time in the House. But I think it is worthwhile to emphasise that this is a bill along with similar pieces of legislation which is seeking to streamline to get rid of the old and the unnecessary to ensure that courts run efficiently and well and safely. I think many of the measures that have been brought in are what I would describe as very common sense. So the Courts Matters Bill amends 14 Acts governing court security. In particular with this bill and hearing the submissions I remain surprised that it hasn't been done many years earlier. The idea that people would come into a courtroom environment in possession of drugs possibly under the influence of drugs doing violent acts and illegal acts within the court area and that there wasn't really the power of any of the court officials or security officers to deny entry and to remove or detain—how foolish is that. This is a bill whose time has come.It is a group of bills that enjoys cross-party support and was indeed begun under the last Government. A great deal of work was put in by the Hon Amy Adams in ensuring it was in a state of readiness. I commend also the Ministers on the Government side now who have ushered it through because it is important that these sorts of sensible reforms really do get done because I think it improves the public's perception of the justice system. It was said earlier that justice delayed is justice denied and I think there have been a lot of instances where particularly with tribunals—and the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill has made a number of common-sense recommendations that are going to free up 21 tribunals. When I was the Minister of Conservation there were a number of entities whose time had passed. This is a bill that for example enables the Birdlings Flat land to wind up. The commissioner has finished the work. There is no need for it to continue. Similarly with the Real Estate Agents Act there are strike-out powers that are inserted across 13 Acts but they can only be applied if a party was not present or represented at a hearing where they were required to be. So adding in the transitional provisions and making the changes means that the public will get better justice from real estate agents who have not done what they ought to have done. So I think that in all the way that this bill has been put together makes perfect sense. It clears up things that should have been done long ago. It makes things more efficient safer and more cost-effective. Who would not agree with this bill? I commend it to the House.
Webb DuncanDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. I was a bit upset with the whip for New Zealand First who said that this material was as dry as old chips when in fact this is just like a steaming piece of fish really because it's a fantastic bill. If I could just say that particularly the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill is really really important. What I want to really focus on here is the central place that tribunals play in access to justice. In particular the disputes tribunal here is really being brought up to date with for example its own registry so that it can be managed separately from the District Court have its own training and management of its referees and so on—and also the ability to use audio-visual links as well. This is simply modernisation. As a member on the other side said moments ago the increase of the jurisdiction to $30000 is really really important because for many people the disputes tribunal—a very simple very straightforward tribunal with no lawyers—is really the only way they're going to access the justice system in a speedy way and a cost-effective way.The other thing the bill does is tidy up a number of things around things like vexatious litigants litigants that don't turn up and really the ability to move things along. So Subpart 4 of Part 1 that deals with disputes tribunals is one little part of this bill but it really is indicative of what the bill does as a whole which is to modernise tribunals which probably serve one of the most important parts in our justice system for many New Zealanders who don't see the higher courts at all. So well done to Minister Sio. I absolutely commend this bill to the House. Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker.
Bennett DavidHon DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. I just want to thank you for your great role as an Assistant Speaker of this House as well. That's two Speakers in two days that I've praised—the first one I didn't really want to have to but I had to—but this one's genuine praise.When we come to this bill it's very good to see that there is support amongst the House for this because when it comes to the courts and tribunals of this country they play an important role in making our justice system work. I just want to first of all pay tribute to all those people that are involved in our courts and tribunals system whether it is the advocates on the prosecution or defence side or the judges or all those staff that make sure they tick along nicely. You deal with some of our most difficult situations that can be quite personal and can be quite difficult to deal with in the heat of the moment. I think this Parliament owes those people a moment of gratitude and thanks for the good work they do. Anything we can do in this Parliament to assist them in their work to make their job easier is something that I think we should be very proud of.This bill has essentially got two main parts to it. One is the Courts Matters Bill and the second one is in regards to the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill. So basically together those pieces of legislation really simplify and enshrine a better system so that we have a more effective courts and tribunals system. I also wish to pay tribute to Chris Penk who is an exemplary new member of this House who has done a lot of work in the courts area. As we go into the election campaign in a few months' time I'm sure that you will see Chris Penk's—Hon Tracey Martin: A few months' time? A by-election! A by-election!Hon DAVID BENNETT: Is that something over there from New Zealand First?ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Hang on—settle down. Settle down. Let's carry on with this debate thank you.Hon DAVID BENNETT: Yes. It's a shame when New Zealand First has to interrupt speeches when their great leader would never do such a thing. But I'd like to pay tribute to Chris Penk who's doing a great job in this area as well. I'm sure we'll see many more reforms come through under his name that will be just as good as this but actually better more advanced and for the betterment of our system. Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker.
Mitchell MarkHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. It's a pleasure to stand and take a call on this the third readings of the Courts Matters Bill and the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill. I just want to start by acknowledging a couple of fine young security officers that are down working in the Gisborne court. I was down there about six weeks ago with the Hon Anne Tolley. We went to the court and we met all of the staff there and they were telling me about some of the issues that they have to deal with—bearing in mind that there's plenty of unsavoury characters also that have to actually access and use our courts. They are often carrying—and the last speaker made reference to it—all manner of weapons knives etc. They carry a fair bit of risk in their job.I want to acknowledge Cary Walker who is working there as one of those guards and actually had a long and distinguished career in the Gisborne police as a police dog handler and I was lucky enough to work with him as well. He is now working at the courts as a court security officer. They were very happy and very pleased to see the changes that were being made to extend the powers of court security officers to deny entry and to remove and detain people who possess illegal drugs or who act threateningly or abusively or commit minor crimes on court premises. Up until now they didn't have the powers to be able to actually act and detain and to be able to deal with those people. So this is a very very good change that is contained within this bill.I'd just very quickly like to also refer to the change that's being made around the threshold for a claim that's going to the disputes tribunal. The monetary limit has been has been lifted from $15000 to $30000. The reason why I really like this is because this was my member's bill that I brought to the House and it was picked up and it was included in this bill that we're now speaking to. It actually originated with one of our policy groups with one of our National Party branches in Auckland. They brought this as a remit to our regional conference and we thought it was a very very good bill. We picked it up and I had it in the biscuit tin as my member's bill. The reason why it is so good is because actually the disputes tribunal means that essentially small to medium sized businesses can have access to a tribunal process which is much quicker and more efficient and it's also a lot less costly than having to take a claim to court. Often if they had a claim under $15000 when you think about it it really didn't probably make sense for them to take it to court because the costs of actually going through that process were probably going to cost them more than the actual claim and the money that they were trying to get back. So it also by increasing the threshold means that again instead of them giving up a claim they can now have the confidence that they can actually bring that claim to the disputes tribunal and it can be dealt with—anything under $30000.So I'm very happy to stand take a short call and support and recommend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Bishop ChrisCHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South): Thank you very much Madam Assistant Speaker. I was commenting to one of my friends and colleagues before that it feels like we've been debating this legislation for ever. It seems like every time I come down to the House we're debating the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill and the Courts Matters Bill.Simon O'Connor: Career defining.CHRIS BISHOP: Well Career defining." my colleague Simon O'Connor says. I'm not sure about that but they are good pieces of legislation that the Opposition wholeheartedly supports. The genesis of this legislation goes actually back to the last Parliament and the last Government. They progressed through the Parliament as a cognate package really because it makes sense to bring all the changes in together and to consider them together. It came out of very good work by the officials. I do in our third reading of these bills want to pay tribute to the good work of the officials both within the Ministry of Justice but also the Parliamentary Counsel Office.As you can see this is a weighty tome the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill—162 pages. It's fair to say it makes the operation of our tribunals and our court system more efficient and it makes a whole series a whole suite of changes that will generally make things more efficient and more effective. Just to give you one example if you go to subpart 11 to do with the Legal Services Act we're talking about changes like the insertion by clause 133 of new section 55A "Procedure": "Forms for use in the Tribunal may be approved by the chief executive of the Ministry after consulting the Tribunal." Very small very discrete changes—a lot of the time they're clarificatory changes.When we were on the Justice Committee in both the last Parliament and latterly in the new Parliament we did hear about a series of changes—a lot of clarifications and a lot of "for the avoidance of doubt" provisions I think it would be fair to say. Look it's been through a thorough process. We did consider it extremely thoroughly at the Justice Committee. I think it's fair to say the Justice Committee is the hardest working committee in the Parliament and I'm not just saying that because I see Greg O'Connor waving at me across the House; I am saying that because as much as it seems like we're always debating this bill—and finally we won't be because it's going to get its third reading—it feels like the Justice Committee is always sitting. It's like rust: never sleeping. We're always sitting and we're always on the go. I know that there's more legislation coming from this activist Government but we will give it the due consideration that it deserves in due course."
Warren-Clark Angie; Williams PotoANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. When I think about controversial issues that have come to this House over the years and I think about where people sit and whether they're on the right or the wrong side of history I think about the Springbok Tour and our nuclear-free stance and I think about what our grandchildren will think of this conversation that we've had today in this House. Absolutely—absolutely—this is the beginning of change in this country. I have a very short time today but I am proud to stand here and speak on behalf of this Government in regards to the beginning of the transition away from oil and gas. The Crown Minerals (Petroleum) Amendment Bill is putting in place something that we have strongly looked at across many years and that is putting in place something for the environment.The market—the market—has not managed to do this; the Government has to step in and do this. There have been many years where there has been the opportunity for gas companies to make a change and they talk now of stranded assets yet climate change has been coming at us like a slow-burning train. It is here and we need to act—we need to act. Our world is changing and we have a crisis with global warming. What will happen to our whakapapa Mr Müller? What will happen when our community of Tauranga no longer has half of its environment because of global warming? What will happen when the food chain breaks down? Can we eat money—can we eat money? We cannot.What I would like to address—very quickly because I have very short time—is leakage. Ooh not that kind of leakage—carbon leakage. What we're talking about here and the argument we've all heard from the Opposition is that Ooh we're going to buy from somewhere worse and it's going to be terrible." Well guess what? The world isn't sitting still. The world is moving on and the world is looking at alternatives—looking at alternatives to oil and gas and coal—and that is the argument that the Opposition have failed to take into account when they consider that carbon leakage will occur. Carbon leakage does not sit in a context of not moving forward. The world is moving forward and we have to keep up. We have to lead. We have to be honest that actually if we don't support our environment if we don't move to a just transition of 30-plus years people—30-plus years. We have to do this because the market has not and we are prepared to be bold and to do this. I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Just before I call the honourable member I just want to remind members: if we're going to refer to other members we should do our best endeavours to make sure we get the names right."
Privilege — Parliamentary Security—Threat of Cyber-attacks
Motions — Anniversary—Influenza epidemic Samoa
Mallard TrevorPRIVILEGEParliamentary Security—Threat of Cyber-AttacksSPEAKER: Members I have been concerned at the possible threat that cyber-attacks may pose to the security of our Parliament. It is a concern shared with my predecessor the Rt Hon David Carter who began work to address it in his time as Speaker. Such attacks are known to have occurred in overseas parliaments. Whether they seek to disrupt the business of Parliament or Government or to target individual members and their constituents it is important that Parliament is as well defended as possible from such attacks.Taking steps to prevent overseas intrusions into our information systems also raises the issue of allowing high levels of access to a third party provider in the parliamentary complex in relation to member and staff devices. The exercise of such access must be balanced against members' freedom to carry out their functions as elected representatives and the House's power to control its own proceedings and precincts without outside interference.The parliamentary precincts are also a workplace for both parliamentary employees and employees of Government departments. Access to parliamentary information systems must therefore also have regard to the respective rights of employers and employees and the role of the Speaker as responsible Minister and the Prime Minister and her Ministers.Before undertaking further steps to secure Parliament against cyber-attacks I believe that we need to assure ourselves that such security measures will not obstruct members and officers of the House in the discharge of their duties. The matter is one that should be considered by the Privileges Committee. Consequently I have determined that a general question of privilege arises. The question stands referred to the Privileges Committee.
Sio Hon Aupito WilliamWEDNESDAY 7 NOVEMBER 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.MOTIONSSamoa—Influenza Epidemic AnniversaryHon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO (Minister for Pacific Peoples): I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the start of the influenza epidemic in Samoa.SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none.Hon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO: I move That this House acknowledge that today marks the 100th anniversary of the New Zealand ship Talune arriving in Apia from Auckland carrying foreign passengers with influenza that subsequently infected approximately 8500 people more than 22 percent of Samoa's population which is one of the most disastrous epidemics recorded anywhere in the world in proportion of deaths to population.Motion agreed to.
Tuesday 6 November 2018 (continued on Wednesday 7 November 2018) - Volume 734
Luxton JoJO LUXTON (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. I just rise to take a really short call in support of the Telecommunications (New Regulatory Framework) Amendment Bill. One particular part of this piece of legislation that I particularly like is that it puts a framework in place that's going to support long-term investment and ultra-fast broadband providers are not going to be able to make a large profit at the expense of the consumer. I think that's one of the key things about it—that it's really important that the consumer is protected here and has better protections at least anyway because we know that the internet is no longer a nice-to-have"; it's actually an "essential-to-have". We use it in our education system. We have businesses that rely solely on that type of function through internet—that's just how their business operates completely. We find that more and more people are actually working from home and therefore it's really important that they have the good connectivity that we have.So as I've said it's no longer a "nice-to-have"; it's actually an essential thing that we need to have. Again I think it's imperative that the consumer is protected given those reasons. So I'm not going to take up any more time and I commend this bill to the House.Bill read a third time.The House adjourned at 10.10 a.m. (Wednesday)"
Lubeck MarjaMARJA LUBECK (Labour): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. This is the third reading of the Telecommunications (New Regulatory Framework) Amendment Bill and I'm very pleased to be taking a short call on it. I wasn't part of the select committee that dealt with this bill and I have to admit when I was first reading through the document my eyes did start to glaze over as I learnt more about copper fixed line services regulation than I ever thought I needed to know. But this is obviously a very important bill as we have heard from our wonderful colleague Clare Curran as well.I'd like to commend the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee on the great work that they've done on this because this bill modernises the Telecommunications Act ensuring that we have a stable framework for fibre access services in New Zealand and enhancing New Zealand's connectivity.On a personal note I share the sentiments expressed by Ian McKelvie. My family too lives rural and at first it looked like we couldn't get internet at all. We did eventually get some broadband but it's over copper lines and we might as well be on dial-up. It's so frustrating. So I know on a personal note that my family is welcoming this legislation.Look I've very little to add after Clare Curran spoke so eloquently about the issues in this bill explaining what it is about and explaining the important changes that the Supplementary Order Paper is making after the feedback to the select committee. So I'd like to end on the fact that this bill obviously gives certainty to the industry. It encourages further investment by network providers but at the same time it also protects the consumers. I commend this bill to the House.
Webb DuncanDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. It appears that peace has broken out. Indeed Mr Goldsmith was right: when we don't need to regulate something of course we shouldn't. It is an interesting and very useful piece of legislation though because what we have is a huge and largely Crown-funded investment in infrastructure. What we see here is technology moving very very fast indeed—not only from copper to fibre but we see very near on the horizon 5G which may indeed make some of the infrastructure we have largely redundant.One of the real challenges of this legislation was how to deal with the fact that these businesses—Chorus and other local providers—have put huge amounts of fibre under the ground at hundreds of millions of dollars of cost and yet now they're being asked to provide those services to cellphone towers which may in fact be undercutting their own market. Now that was a real challenge and I must say that the Minister of Broadcasting Communications and Digital Media took that on and has done a very good job in essentially saying that there won't be price regulation in respect of those ultra-fast broadband services in those non-Chorus settings. There are contractual arrangements for Chorus but in the other settings the decision has been made to say Look there is the shadow of regulation but no price regulation at all." so that there can be some flexibility some versatility in terms of facing these new challenges about how you price something which was designed to go to business premises and household premises but now may well be going to cellphone towers which themselves serve 200 or 300 homes. There are some really difficult technical challenges in there and I must say that I commend both the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee and also the Minister for engaging with industry at every level to address those very very difficult issues.So in sum this is a piece of legislation which addresses competition issues where monopolies tend to emerge in a rapidly changing technological environment. It's a technical piece of legislation but an absolutely essential one. On that basis I commend this bill to the House."
Jones ShaneHon SHANE JONES (Minister for Infrastructure): Tēnā koe. I stand to take a call on this particular bill which obviously New Zealand First supports. My thoughts actually go back to the troubled time when an erstwhile colleague David Cunliffe had some measure of influence over this sector. In those days Theresa Gattung if I'm not mistaken was the CEO of Telecom and Roderick Deane was the chair. We were concerned about the inordinate amount of influence and power that that entity Telecom enjoyed—monopolistic power. The virtue of this bill is that time has passed and now what we're doing is we're looking at and surveying a situation where there's more competitiveness but within that more competitive structure there are still unfinished issues.One of those does need to be elaborated upon partly because it was championed as my colleague Clare Curran has referred to by Minister Tracey Martin and that was to ensure that stranded communities or legacy communities—given that I'm 59 I'll soon be over 65 if my former rugby injuries don't blight my prospects in the future. The reality is that not everyone is as comfortable or as adept as the new generation in using technology. So we developed protections in this bill to ensure that emergency calling was not left to the whims of arbitrary decision makers in these organisations and to ensure that communities in rural New Zealand and in particular communities of the elderly aren't forgotten about. As we are further rolling out ICT services through—I digress for a minute—the Provincial Growth Fund we're actually building upon something that I personally agree with what was done. You can debate whether or not the former Minister Steven Joyce took the right approach but he most certainly put the proverbials on the line and committed the Crown to an enormous amount of capital expenditure. In my part of the world we've actually seen that model roll out quite well certainly in Whangarei—not so good further north. So whilst it's had a long-term gestation we won't have a modern economy with what we expect for this generation and future generations unless we get the right balance between investment and a strong regulator. I'm very happy to see that the bill does not cancel the levy. I quite like the model of a levy and look forward to applying it to other parts of the economy. If it's good enough for the telecommunications part of the economy I see great prospects in the banking part. That unfortunately lies with another Minister; however my advocacy will not be quelled. So without further ado our party supports this bill and commends its expeditious passing through the House.
Thursday 1 November 2018 - Volume 734
Taxation (Research and Development Tax Credits) Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Taxation (Research and Development Tax Credits) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 115New Zealand National 52; New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 1ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee.
Crown Minerals (Petroleum) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
VoteThe question was put that the amendments recommended by the Environment Committee by majority be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the question be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 54; ACT New Zealand 1.Question agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the Crown Minerals (Petroleum) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 54; ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a second time.