edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Webb DuncanDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker.Chlöe Swarbrick: Give us a lecture.Dr DUNCAN WEBB: No no I'm not going to give you a lecture today Ms Swarbrick.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I was just observing to my friend that it was such a good eight seconds I'm not sure I could improve on it but what I was actually going to say to Ms Swarbrick on this auspicious occasion of hers was Many happy tax returns." But this bill is an important bill and it is one where there's a lot of cross-party agreement so that's good to see. It's also worth noting that New Zealand's at the forefront of this in implementing the OECD G20 base erosion and profit shifting action plan. And here we have it—one of the first countries to actually put this into place. And it's really important to note that this is part of a global network. It's about tightening the net. It's been observed in the House already that there are businesses out there that purport to make no profit in New Zealand and that's simply a fiction. What they are doing is making great profits in New Zealand but by essentially fictional arrangements they're moving those profits offshore. And what this bill does through the various measures it has is to eradicate those fictions so that when there are loans as opposed to equity investments those loans must be at market rates. And there's a lot of detail around that. But the principle is this: the rules and frameworks that are imposed by this legislation create real commercial transactions so that real profits are shown and if losses are claimed they are genuine losses.Transfer pricing is another one of these tools—the idea that when goods or services move between related companies they've got to be priced realistically and fairly and of course the permanent establishment rule: the idea that if you have an actual business that is genuinely being conducted in New Zealand then it will be recognised as established in New Zealand and taxed accordingly.These are just some of the tools that are in this legislation. But I must say it is good to see that in New Zealand and elsewhere the whole idea of tax dodging as being a sport is something of the past; that in fact we now recognise that these global entities if they're going to have a licence to trade in New Zealand and in any civilised nation they must meet their fair share; that as part of the social contract we won't have tax havens we won't have—for illegitimate profit shifting that in fact there's a recognition that this is an important bill.And if I can just say just one real observation: Therese Turner the specialist who assisted the Finance and Expenditure Committee brought the most complex piece of legislation down to earth in the way that only she could so that committee members like me were able to engage in it and I hope—with our friends on the other side of the House—improve it. So on that basis I commend this bill to the House."
Williams PotoTAXATION (NEUTRALISING BASE EROSION AND PROFIT SHIFTING) BILLThird ReadingASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! Just before I call the Minister can I have order when votes are being taken and when the Clerk is speaking. There's just a bit of unruliness creeping into the House this afternoon.Hon Stuart Nash: Madam Assistant Speaker I move—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Just wait. Can I call you first? I call the Hon Stuart Nash.
Prime Willow-JeanWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour): It is an honour to be the final speaker in the debate on the third reading of the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill. In that last speech I think that is exactly the reason why when I was at the Kaitāia market on the weekend one of Matt King's constituents came up to me and said We don't want to pay for Auckland's roads." I said to him "Guess what? You're not going to have to pay for Auckland's roads if we are able to get this legislation through." He told me he voted for you. The other reason why he got so frustrated was for that comment that we just heard then—"Auckland's a region so why can't we also have you pay for our roads Northland and everywhere else and get that provincial growth funding?" No it's coming to the regions like Northland—thank you to that Minister of the regions over there Shane Jones. Now I want to also just take this opportunity to talk about the poll that my opponent Matt King apparently spoke about on Facebook. Well I just did a quick search of the things I've been tagged in and there are three comments that I want to read because it goes to the absolute frustration of people who are living in Auckland. Here is one mum. I can't read the first three words because they are inappropriate in this House but it follows on and says "Two hours to get home from work with my babies in tow." I feel for that mama who has similar-aged children to me. Two hours in the car—the levels of frustration of the mum and those children build and build and build. Here's another one: "People are leaving because of the traffic." Another person said on my page "Stuck in traffic. Now I know why I left Auckland." and we welcome them home. It's absolutely wonderful to have our whanaunga home but the fact is that they've been driven out of Auckland because of this problem. The last one—back to 2013 this comment I was tagged in—"Wow no Facebook-suitable words for Auckland traffic when you've got places to be." I think that was in reference to going to the Beyoncé concert and not even being able to make it there on time because of the traffic in Auckland. Auckland is at a standstill and we understand the frustration of its ratepayers who are spending hours stuck in traffic every day. We have a plan. We have a plan and as our Minister Phil Twyford said let's do this. So I want to thank the Minister for his leadership I want to thank the Finance and Expenditure Committee and I want to acknowledge all of the submitters for and against who submitted on this legislation. 1 July is an important day in this calendar for us getting on with the plan to address these issues. I commend the bill to the House."
Allan KiritapuKIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour): What an extraordinary time to be in the House and have this really odd debate because it does appear that the Opposition is (a) factually incorrect about—the last member who spoke was just factually incorrect about a range of different matters in regard to the bill. I might step through a couple of those issues shortly. But it's almost like the Opposition is (a) anti-Auckland and (b) anti-progress because the only reason that we're having this debate right now is that Auckland City is at a standstill. It's at a standstill because the previous Government failed year upon year upon year upon year to invest in the necessary infrastructure to enable New Zealand's largest city to get ahead. Now I find myself in this really odd position where I'm flabbergasted because I don't understand the principal proposition of the Opposition to this very hard-fought bill that the Hon Phil Twyford has been going like the clappers to try and find cash for the much-needed infrastructure in Auckland City.Now I have listened for hours upon hours through the committee stage and now again reiterated in this third reading—the Opposition seems to be very concerned about the fact that Democracy has gone awry in New Zealand." They call it "the peril of New Zealand" and so on and so forth. But I actually want to talk about the collegiality that the members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee had with members of the Opposition to come to a point where we could have a rational debate about this tax. Now it was at the request of the Hon Amy Adams who rightly raised the issue: "Actually you know what there's going to be some concern from constituents in Auckland. I think we should take the select committee up there have a debate and enable participants from up in Auckland who will be the most impacted by this regional fuel proposal to have that debate up in Auckland." So what did we do? We sat around and we found time and said "Yep. Anywhere you guys want to take this let's do it." Because we on this side of the House are genuinely concerned about how to tackle the hard issues of how you (a) enable people just to engage with us. We're not trying to like ram home taxes that nobody wants.Now I know the member opposite old Matty King he mentioned a Facebook poll—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! Order! Order!KIRITAPU ALLAN: Matthew King from Northland mentioned a Facebook poll which said heaps of people were opposed to the tax. But the reality is that Aucklanders actually want solutions for the standstill that they're in. Now the reality is that there's a $1.3 billion deficit—per annum—as a result of the congestion issues up in Auckland. I don't understand the Opposition's opposition to this very pragmatic solution and I want to commend this bill to the House and commend the work of the Hon Phil Twyford for coming up with a plan and coming up with solutions which is something the Opposition failed to do for nine long years."
Lubeck MarjaMARJA LUBECK (Labour): Tēnā koe Madam Assistant Speaker and thank you. I am very happy to take a call on this Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill. It's a much-needed bill and it's the first step in tackling the congestion—that we need to address—that Auckland is facing. Most arguments on why it's so desperately needed have been put very eloquently by members of this side of the House so I'll keep mine fairly short.I'd just like to point out that it seems very clear that both sides of the House are actually both convinced and we agree that we need to get Auckland moving again. The difference here is that this Government has a plan that's fully funded. The other side of the House has talked about their wish list of projects that they announced prior to the election and that's exactly what it was—it was a wish list without funding allocated to it. A $9 billion hole so those projects would never have seen the light of day. So ours are fully funded. Basically what is going to happen is that we're going to get this legislation in place get the money in place and finally—Simeon Brown: Is Penlink fully funded?MARJA LUBECK: —put our money where our mouth is. Yes and I will talk about Penlink. Mr Mitchell and I have been having a bit of social media banter on Penlink. After he spoke in the House for the first time I believe since his maiden speech he spoke about this local project called Penlink. I had the privilege only a few months into my new role to talk for the people of Rodney about this local project. What confuses me is that Mr Mitchell is voting against this bill because it means that Penlink would never be built. It would basically mean that Penlink would go back to the promise it was back in 2006 when National said We promise to build Penlink within 10 years of becoming Government."—2006. But they never did.Now what I will want to ask the Minister because I am disappointed with the initial time line put on this project—I'd like to add my support to the local boards who have strongly advocated for Penlink to be brought forward and I urge the Minister to do what he can to get Penlink brought forward from the initial time line prove that member of Botany wrong and get that spade into the ground and get Penlink going. Thank you. I commend this bill to the House."
Amended Answer to Written Question — Question No. 12265 (2018)
By-election — Northcote
Obituary — Koro Wetere
Twyford PhilAMENDED ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONSQuestion No. 12265 (2018)Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Housing and Urban Development): I seek leave to make a—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: I have called the Hon Phil Twyford.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: Well no he's on a point of order.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Oh is he?SPEAKER: He is.Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I seek leave to make a personal statement correcting an answer that I made to a written question that was quoted in question No. 7 today.SPEAKER: The member seeks leave to make such a statement. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.Hon PHIL TWYFORD: My written answer to question No. 12265 incorrectly stated that I had met with the director and president of the China Development Bank; in fact I met with the director and president of another organisation who were acting as intermediaries for the China Development Bank hence my answer to the oral question today.
Smith Nick; Mallard TrevorPoints of Order—Personal Reflections and Unparliamentary Language Use of mates' rates"Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Earlier in question time you required that I withdraw and apologise for using the phrase "mates' rates". I've checked in the Hansard and that phrase has been used over a dozen times including by yourself sir.SPEAKER: What I did doesn't make it right."
Mallard TrevorBY-ELECTIONNorthcoteSPEAKER: I have received from the Electoral Commission a writ declaring Daniel Michael Bidois to be elected to represent the electorate of Northcote.
Mallard TrevorTUESDAY 26 JUNE 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.OBITUARIESHon Koro Tainui Wētere CBESPEAKER: I regret to inform the House of the death on 23 June 2018 of the Hon Koro Tainui Wētere CBE who represented the Western Maori electorate between 1969 and 1996. He was Minister of Māori Affairs from 1984 to 1990 and held a number of other ministerial portfolios during his parliamentary career including Minister of Lands and Minister of Forests.E hiahia ana ahau hei māngai mō Te Whare nei ki te whakapuaki nei o te mamae kua pā ki te ngākau me te aroha ki te whānau pani o te mema o mua kua hinga nei. Kia inoi au kia tū wahangū tātou ko ngā mema o Te Whare ka tangi ki a ia.[As the Speaker of this House I would like to express the pain in our hearts and our love to the bereaved family of the past member who has passed away. I request that all members of the House stand together in silence to mourn him.]Members stood as a mark of respect.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That urgency be accorded to the committee stage and third reading of the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill and to the committee stage and third reading of the Taxation (Neutralising Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) Bill.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 55.Motion agreed to.
Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill — In Committee
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the committee report progress and sit again presently.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 55.Motion agreed to.House resumed.The Chairperson reported progress on the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill and no progress on the Taxation (Neutralising Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) Bill.Report adopted.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Imprest Supply (First for 2018/19) Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a third time.
Imprest Supply (First for 2018/19) Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Appropriation (2017/18 Supplementary Estimates) Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a third time.
Appropriation (2017/18 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Appropriation (2017/18 Supplementary Estimates) Bill and the Imprest Supply (First for 2018/19) Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.Bills read a second time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Imprest Supply (First for 2018/19) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a first time.
Imprest Supply (First for 2018/19) Bill — First Reading
10. Employment Minister—Funding for Young People Not in Employment Education or TrainingTAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of EmploymentEmployment Minister—Funding for Young People Not in Employment Education or Training10. TAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of Employment: What recent announcements has he made about young people not engaged in education employment or training?Hon WILLIE JACKSON (Minister of Employment): On 1 June in Northland I announced $4.4 million in funding to three community-led initiatives in Te Tai Tokerau that will support rangatahi into industry-related training and employment pathways that are underpinned by pastoral care. In the past few months I have announced funding for seven He Poutama Rangatahi initiatives in Te Tai Rāwhiti Te Tai Tokerau and Ōpōtiki—some of the regions in New Zealand with the highest levels of young people not earning or learning. This represents a financial commitment of up to $6.75 million over the next two years.Tamati Coffey: Why was that particular announcement significant?Hon WILLIE JACKSON: The announcement is significant as it represents a shift in the paradigm in funding in that we are partnering with communities who've identified the issues and establish solutions with a community-centric focus. This is dedicated funding the first of its kind to address the gaps that our young people are facing. These regions have been clearly underfunded for the past nine years and this is part of this Government's commitment to show we care about the ongoing success of young New Zealanders.Tamati Coffey: What other announcement has the Minister made or will make about young people not earning or learning?Hon WILLIE JACKSON: As part of Budget 2018 this Government announced that just under $14 million has been set aside to tackle the number of rangatahi Māori who are not earning or learning and who come from our urban centres. The news gets even better as this Friday in the Hawke's Bay I'll be making even further He Poutama Rangatahi announcements to a community committed to the ongoing success of their young people and this Government is backing them all the way.
6. Tax System—ComplianceDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of RevenueTax System—Compliance6. Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of Revenue: What recent announcements has he made in relation to cracking down on non-compliance in the tax system?Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Revenue): This coalition Government is committed to creating more fairness in the tax system. Budget 2018 gives inland revenue $31.3 million of operating spending over the next four years to improve tax compliance. Of this $23.5 million will be dedicated to a targeted campaign ensuring that outstanding company - tax returns are filed and $3 million will be used to analyse the potential legislative opportunities. This is expected to recover approximately $183 million or a return on investment of $6 for every $1 spent.Hon Grant Robertson: Oh well done.Hon STUART NASH: Thank you.Dr Deborah Russell: What advice has he received around the scale of non-compliance in the tax system?Hon STUART NASH: IRD officials have informed me that companies currently have over 100000 returns outstanding and recent research by inland revenue and Victoria University estimates that the average under-reporting of self-employed and contractual work is at 20 percent on average or around $800 million per year. This is simply not fair on all those hard-working Kiwis who comply with their tax obligations and pay their fair share of tax.Dr Deborah Russell: What measures is the Government undertaking to support compliance in addition to cracking down on non-compliance?Hon STUART NASH: Hand in hand with measures to encourage compliance the Government knows it needs to do more to simplify the tax system. The Business Transformation programme provides these opportunities to get things right from the start—for example taxpayers now have the ability to enter into instalment arrangements online instead of calling the IRD and for individual taxpayers we are also making progress to eliminate the burden of secondary tax.
3. Families Package—Impact and ReactionDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of FinanceFamilies Package—Impact and Reaction3. Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of Finance: Will this Government's Families Package support low- and middle-income families; if so how?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Yes. The Government's Families Package most of which will come into effect on 1 July will provide targeted income assistance to boost the incomes of middle and low income families particularly by increasing the Working for Families tax credits and raising the abatement threshold introducing a Best Start payment of $60 per week to assist families during the critical first few years of life and increasing paid parental leave to 26 weeks. When rolled out fully Mr Speaker as I'm sure you're aware 385000 families with children will be better off by an average of $75 per week.Dr Duncan Webb: What specific examples can the Minister provide of families that will be better off under this package?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Once these changes begin to take effect on 1 July a majority of Kiwi families with children will be pleased to see their incomes rise. For example a Hamilton couple with a six-month-old and a four-year-old earning $65000 a year will see their income rise by $63.87 a week from 1 July this year. Once the package is fully rolled out from 1 July 2020 a family in that same situation would be $123.87 per week better off. The Families Package represents a major step in delivering meaningful improvements to the lives of New Zealanders—in particular our children.Dr Duncan Webb: Has the Government received any feedback from people who will benefit from these changes?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: People have already begun to write in to us and to say what this package means to them. One woman who contacted the Prime Minister's office said this: It is more than money. It is that someone actually has validated our existence and seen that we are not victims that life has just played a curly hand. Thank you Jacinda and your team for caring. It has given me such a motivation to get well and back to being a proud and productive citizen of New Zealand.""
Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee
Hipkins ChrisHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That the motion be amended to delete all the words after That" and replace them with "That it be an instruction to the committee that the remaining questions on the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill be put without further debate."It is an interesting approach for the Opposition to take to put this motion before the House. It does suggest that the majority of the House be empowered to instruct the Chair as to how they should exercise their discretion. That has been ruled within order and therefore it is within order for the House to instruct the Chair not to take any further calls on that matter which of course will bring the debate to a much faster conclusion and it will be a much more satisfactory outcome from the Government's perspective.I'd encourage the Opposition to consider when they decide to encourage the rules of the House to be changed the ultimate precedent value that that creates and where that may well land up because ultimately the power will remain with the majority in the House in those situations. So I welcome the fact that the House is now being given the opportunity to instruct the committee as to how many speeches there should be on the remaining stages of the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill and I believe that this is a very sound amendment that will ensure that the integrity of the House is preserved."
Hipkins ChrisURGENCYHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That urgency be accorded to the committee stage and third reading of the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill and to the committee stage and third reading of the Taxation (Neutralising Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) Bill. McGee says that the use of urgency is expected to be confined to situations where an urgent approach is genuinely needed." The passing of these two bills meets this criteria quite comfortably. The passing of the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill this week is essential so that the Order in Council in clause 5 under new section 65K of the Land Transport Management Act can be made in time to establish the Auckland regional fuel tax scheme from 1 July as scheduled. A late delay in the start date would make that very difficult if not impossible. The Taxation (Neutralising Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) Bill must be assented by the end of this month to allow the commencement of most of its provisions on 1 July to apply in the income year that begins on that day. Any delay could create serious compliance issues for the IRD and for taxpayers. The bill has been supported by all parties at its first and second reading.The scheduling of the remaining stages of these two bills this week was notified to all parties last Thursday so there are no particular surprises here. The use of urgency today will prevent the disruption of the third readings of the Treaty settlement bills that are planned tomorrow and next Thursday and it will stop the Government having to interrupt members' day next Wednesday which is an undertaking that I have given to members opposite—that we would avoid interrupting members' days wherever possible.Urgency will be used very rarely by this Government as we showed last month when we became the first Government not to seek post-Budget urgency and therefore I ask the House to support the motion."
Twyford Phil; van de Molen Tim; Williams PotoHon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Housing and Urban Development): I move That the committee report progress and sit again presently.TIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I just wanted to refer back to the earlier point of order raised by Mr Ross that was with regards to—Hon Chris Hipkins: No there's a question before the House—there's a question before the House. You've got to wait. TIM VAN DE MOLEN: —thank you—the addition of other amendments in Part 2 covering Acts not included specifically under that. The Chair was going to come back to us with his consideration on that in this part and so I'd be interested to hear whether or not—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): We're still within the Part—[Interruption] Yes I would just ask the member to resume his seat. The Minister actually had just put a question to the committee so just a moment—will you just hold that.
Bakshi Kanwaljit SinghKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): Thank you Madam Chair. You are very kind. You have given me the opportunity to talk about my tabled amendment. Through you I would like to request that the Minister consider this amendment because the veterans have not been mentioned at all and this is very important for the veterans. My amendment amends clause 12 to the Veterans' Support Act 2014 and after section 15(1)(i) inserts (j) Whether the veteran lives in a region where a Regional Fuel Tax scheme is in place."As we know the veterans are those people who have either served in the military forces or fought a war and they are the ones who have made sacrifices. We should consider very seriously that they should be exempted from the regional fuel tax. I know the Minister is listening to all the speeches and he has made the effort to respond to those concerns raised by different speakers. Here I would also like to request New Zealand First through Clayton Mitchell who is the representative of New Zealand First right now in the Chamber and in particular the Hon Ron Mark who always considers himself to be the champion of veterans—this is the amendment which is directly going to affect them.This amendment ensures that Veterans' Affairs New Zealand when deciding whether to provide or contribute to the cost of transport for dependent veterans can take into account the cost of the regional fuel tax. This is very important because we know that veterans have limited resources and if this fuel tax adds to their living costs they are going to suffer. We know they come to different events like they stand up for the people of this country from time to time—in calamities in natural disasters—they come and contribute. This is why this amendment is very important for the veterans and I hope that I will get the support from the opposite side to get it through this process.We know that the veterans from different wars have come back to New Zealand and now are living here. Veterans from the Korean War from Malaysia from Afghanistan from Iraq and from many other parts of the world have come back and settled down and are living in our country. Their contribution—not only their contribution but I think the sacrifices made by their families from time to time—should be considered.I hope that the Minister will give consideration to my amendment which amends the Veterans' Support Act 2014 and inserts a subparagraph in that after subparagraph 15(1)(i): "(j) Whether the veteran lives in a region where a Regional Fuel Tax scheme in place." I hope this relief will go a long way for the veterans. I thank you for the opportunity."
Mitchell ClaytonCLAYTON MITCHELL (Whip—NZ First): I move That the question be now put.
King MattMATT KING (National—Northland): Thank you Mr Chair. It's a pleasure to speak here on this bill. I'd like to acknowledge the assistance of my colleague Harete Hipango from Whanganui with her legal background for the drafting of this amendment.I see in Part 2 clause 11 Amendment to Search and Surveillance Act 2012" an enforcement officer must obtain and execute a search warrant to search for evidence of offences against section 65ZC of the Land Transport Management Act 2003. Now section 65ZC says "A person commits an offence if that person knowingly or recklessly refuses or fails to file a monthly return under section 65Q". Section 65Q says "A regional fuel taxpayer by whom a regional fuel tax is payable under a regional fuel tax scheme in respect of any supplies or transfers of fuel in a month must file with the Agency a monthly return. The return must—(a) be within 20 days of the next month; and (b) be filed in the form and manner reasonably required by the Agency; and (c) contain any information and be accompanied by other documents reasonably required". If they fail to comply under section 65ZC(2) they are liable on conviction to a $15000 fine or $75000 for an organisation. This is bureaucracy gone mad and it's what this Government seems to love imposing on our hard-working New Zealanders.Now I would like to submit this amendment. This section under clause 11(2) amends the Search and Surveillance Act 2002 and section 65ZB inserts after "Land Transport Management Act 2003" the following words: "an enforcement officer may obtain and execute a warrant to search for evidence of offences against section 65ZC of the Land Transport Management Act 2003 only if there shows a repeated and deliberate pattern of avoidance over 12 months". The reason I put that amendment in is because as the law stands now and as it's drafted a person after one month of failing to put a return can be the subject of the execution of a search warrant to search for evidence of offences under the Act. It's my opinion that that's Draconian and in my view it needs to show a pattern of behaviour. So I submit that.I also believe that this regional fuel tax brings a layer of bureaucracy to businesses. Anyone that's run a business knows that this sort of legislation just makes it harder and harder to run a business. I see here under Part 2 clause 10 "Amendments to Local Government Act 2002" in subclause (5) new section 34B says "The regional council of an RFT region in its annual report must report on—(a) the revenue from an RFT scheme paid to the council … that revenue [must be] applied by the council including to which projects and for what purposes (for example capital expenditures debt repayment operational expenditure); and (c) progress with respect to the programme of capital projects supported by the RFT scheme." I submit that this is yet another layer of bureaucracy added to the others that business owners and others under this coalition have to endure."
Allan KiritapuKIRITAPU ALLAN (Assistant Whip—Labour): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Mr Chair I refer you to 62/2 of the speaking orders and the—Hon Tim Macindoe: Speakers' rulings or the Standing Orders?KIRITAPU ALLAN: Speakers' rulings—thank you very much. Speakers' rulings are relatively clear that the form of drafting of a bill is to be taken into consideration in terms of length of debate. I refer to the remarks of our colleague over the other side of the House Tim Macindoe that mentioned that we've been going—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Order!KIRITAPU ALLAN: This is a separate point of order sir.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): It doesn't sound like it so can you get to—KIRITAPU ALLAN: It is a separate point of order sir.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): You need to come to it now though.KIRITAPU ALLAN: Come to—sorry?CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): You need to come to exactly what your point of order is.KIRITAPU ALLAN: We've been debating this Part 2 for in excess of two hours. We've seen an extensive range of amendments that've been tabled. There's nothing in the Standing Orders that require that every single one of these amendments are considered at any length. This Part 2 is a very narrow—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm on my feet—[Interruption] I am on my feet; you sit down. Thank you. Whether the member likes it or not the Chair is the sole decision maker about when to accept the closure motion—OK? For accuracy it has not been going for two hours. There are—[Interruption] I'm on my feet. Don't interrupt—seriously don't do that. As I said that is a matter for the Chair to decide. There are other ways of addressing that; that is not one of them. I'll take the next call.
Ross Jami-Lee; Rurawhe AdrianJAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany): I raise a point of order Mr Chairman. Thank you for giving consideration to the issue. May I make one further submission that I hope may be helpful. Whilst the proposal from Denise Lee could one could argue go into Part 1 we in fact are restricted—were restricted—by Part 1 given that Part 1 is amendments to the Land Transport Management Act. With the way in which this bill has been drafted it effectively has two parts: Part 1 is all of the changes to the Land Transport Management Act and Part 2 is all of the changes to any other Acts. Given that Denise Lee's proposed amendment would seek to amend the Education Act it would not in fact have been possible to put forward Denise Lee's amendment in Part 1 because Part 1 is related to the Land Transport Management Act.If members of Parliament are of a view that we should consider as a committee amendments to other pieces of legislation which are related to a regional fuel tax scheme the only possible avenue for them to do that if it is contained in a different piece of legislation to the Land Transport Management Act is to propose it in Part 2 which she's done. I ask you to consider that point also when you consider your future ruling.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Thank you.
Radhakrishnan Priyanca; Rurawhe AdrianPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour): I move That the question be now put.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I call Chris Penk.Hon Tim Macindoe: Oh really?
Rurawhe AdrianCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Members before I call the next speaker which will be Lawrence Yule I just want to inform the committee that the amendment in the name of Denise Lee amending the Education Act 1989 will be ruled out of order and so cannot be debated.
Twyford PhilHon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Transport): Thank you Mr Chairman. Let me make some comments in response to the last couple of contributions.We've heard a great number of contributions from members on the Opposition benches about clause 7 in Part 2 which requires that GST be added on to the regional fuel tax when it's paid by fuel distributors to the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA)—so not at the retail end not at point of sale but by the fuel distributors—and a number of Opposition members have suggested that this increases the cost of fuel to Auckland consumers from 10c to 11.5c.Tim van de Molen: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Apologies to interrupt the Minister—we are having trouble hearing. The microphone perhaps could do with adjustment or I'm not sure if it's working.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm sure the technicians have heard and hopefully have resolved the issue. We'll give it another go.Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Thank you for that very considerate contribution. So the suggestion that's been made by Opposition members is that the requirement in clause 7 that GST be paid by the fuel distributors to NZTA at the wholesale end not at the retail end is somehow adding to the cost that's being paid by consumers. That suggestion is quite wrong.All of those businesses will be registered for GST. They claim back the GST in the regular course of their interest so they don't pass that on. So it's quite wrong and shows a real misunderstanding by Opposition members. The fuel companies are required to charge GST on the retail price of the fuel that they sell not the wholesale. So whether or not they have to pay GST which they would because undoubtedly all of them will be registered for GST that amount does not get passed on to the consumer.I want to comment on Tim van de Molen's amendment which seeks to add some obligations on to the councils who would be taking advantage of the provisions in this bill to establish a regional fuel tax. Mr van de Molen would like requirements for full consultation publicly notified in advance what the projects are going to be spent on and it's an attempt to try to impose some kind of transparency on it. Well I want to say to Mr van de Molen that there are already extensive obligations on any local territorial authority any regional council who wants to take advantage of the regional fuel tax bill. They're required to fully consult under the terms of the local government legislation and as Lawrence Yule well knows those requirements are onerous to say the least.Auckland Council has just gone through extensive consultation—two rounds of consultation—with the public and with the elected members of the council on this. They have to provide a detailed description of what the proceeds of the fuel tax will be spent on—a list of very precise named capital projects with extensive descriptions beside each one. It cannot be spent on vague promises or operating expenditure that's not directly tied to the items of capital expenditure. So those obligations—actually far more burdensome and exacting than the ones in Mr van de Molen's amendment—are already in place.
Sepuloni CarmelIMPREST SUPPLY (FIRST FOR 2018/19) BILLThird ReadingHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development) on behalf of the Minister of Finance: I move That the Imprest Supply (First for 2018/19) Bill be now read a third time.
Sepuloni CarmelAPPROPRIATION (2017/18 SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES) BILLThird ReadingHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development) on behalf of the Minister of Finance: I move That the Appropriation (2017/18 Supplementary Estimates) Bill be now read a third time.
Robertson GrantIMPREST SUPPLY (FIRST FOR 2018/19) BILLFirst ReadingHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I move That the Imprest Supply (First for 2018/19) Bill be now read a first time.
Motions — Human Rights—World Refugee Day
Ghahraman GolrizWEDNESDAY 20 JUNE 2018The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.MOTIONSWorld Refugee Day—CommemorationGOLRIZ GHAHRAMAN (Green): I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate recognising World Refugee Day. SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that process? There appears to be none. GOLRIZ GHAHRAMAN: I move That this House recognise World Refugee Day and commemorate the strength courage and perseverance of the millions of refugees forced to flee their homes due to war and persecution.Motion agreed to.
Tuesday 19 June 2018 - Volume 730
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.Motion agreed to.DEPUTY SPEAKER: I just ask members to bear with me while we go through the voting. We will take it slowly to make sure that every amendment is addressed.Hon Member: Fair call. Don't want to confuse them.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Or me.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 43 in the name of the Hon Phil Twyford to clause 5 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Matt King to clause 5 be agreed to: in the definition of exempt use in new section 65A insert after paragraph (e) the following paragraph:(f)use in any vehicle that is primarily used for commercial horticultural activities.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 55New Zealand National 55.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Tim van de Molen to clause 5 be agreed to: in the definition of exempt use in new section 65A insert after paragraph (e) the following paragraph:(f)use in the course of any commercial tourism operation that occurs off-roadA party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 55New Zealand National 55.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Tim van de Molen to clause 5 be agreed to: in the definition of exempt use in new section 65A insert after paragraph (e) the following paragraph:(f)any use of recreational marine activities.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 55New Zealand National 55.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Nathan Guy to clause 5 be agreed to: in the definition of exempt use in new section 65A insert after paragraph (e) the following paragraph:(f)use by any vehicle that is primarily operated during the course of commercial farming operations.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 55New Zealand National 55.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lawrence Yule to clause 5 be agreed to: in the definition of exempt use in new section 65A insert after paragraph (e) the following paragraph:(f)any use for commercial horticultural activities.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 55New Zealand National 55.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment not agreed to.
12. Local Government—Auckland CouncilDENISE LEE (National—Maungakiekie) to the Minister of Local GovernmentLocal Government—Auckland Council12. DENISE LEE (National—Maungakiekie) to the Minister of Local Government: Is she satisfied with the current Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): It's not a matter of whether or not I'm satisfied; the Act sets out the basis on which the availability of local government information can be accessed by the public. While I'm aware some issues arise from time to time there is a process for councils to address concerns internally or through the Office of the Ombudsmen.Denise Lee: Do the current tensions at Auckland Council with nine councillors signing a letter of complaint to the mayor for the withholding of official information not highlight that there is an urgent need for reform of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) 1987?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: I expect local authorities to meet their obligations under core legislation such as LGOIMA and the Local Government Act 2002. Local authorities are required to release requested information unless they consider there is a good reason for not doing so in accordance with the grounds specified in the LGOIMA. If a person is not satisfied with the outcome they can seek a review—Denise Lee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: The member can't—the member's answering.Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: —through the Ombudsman and this is the case in the matter that that member's referring to.SPEAKER: All right. A point of order Denise Lee.Denise Lee: The Minister was not answering my question in regards to: do the current tensions not highlight an urgent need for a review of the LGOIMA?SPEAKER: Well I took from the Minister's answer that in fact that's exactly what she was saying—that it did not.Denise Lee: Supplementary.SPEAKER: No the member's had all her supplementaries.
10. Regional Economic Development—Announcements Provincial Growth Fund and ReportsJENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister for Regional Economic DevelopmentRegional Economic Development—Announcements Provincial Growth Fund and Reports10. JENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister for Regional Economic Development: What recent announcements has he made regarding regional economic development?Hon SHANE JONES (Minister for Regional Economic Development): A bountiful supply of good news. Last week on behalf of the Government I announced a $10 million loan for the high-speed gondola on the Whakapapa ski field. This will enable people whose ambulance isn't what it should be to enjoy that vista. It is very friendly towards senior citizens who also will have the opportunity to go up the mountain and enjoy that part of New Zealand's natural landscape. The development of the gondola will create up to 150 jobs and it is speculated that nigh on 400 jobs additionally will be created.Jenny Marcroft: What recent reports has he seen regarding regional development?Hon SHANE JONES: Today I have received a report from Te Tai Poutini - the West Coast. They are confident that now they have been identified as a surge region they are no longer lost with a small paltry promise of less than $11 million which was never delivered over the last nine years. I have encouraged them to bring an expansive broad set of proposals forward and I am sure that that report will turn into genuine economic growth to diversify the revenue bases of the West Coast.Jenny Marcroft: How is the Provincial Growth Fund structured to ensure all regions benefit from it?Hon SHANE JONES: There have been some tawdry and unkind things said about the breadth of the fund. The fund has the services of a highly respected New Zealand businessman Mr Rodger Finlay. That particular panel is ensuring that the opportunities that are originated and promoted come from the four winds and that we are disposed of these unkind cruel things said about Northland and those former National MPs who had to turn to Matua Shane Jones in order for their dreams to be achieved.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister as to whether it's a fact that this regional development fund is per capita the biggest in the OECD by far?Hon SHANE JONES: Yes I have been informed by a whole host of economic development experts that nowhere in the OECD per capita based on our regional population is there a fund that approaches anywhere near the strength the reach and the power of this fund. And it's with great humility that my hand is on the tiller.