edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Henare PeeniHon PEENI HENARE (Minister of Tourism): Thank you to the members for their questions and I'm going to try and address some of them in my contribution here. Independent research commissioned by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment found that around 76 percent of New Zealanders thought that freedom camping has negative impacts on the local environment. If we're looking towards clear research and evidence to make sure that the moves we are making here with this particular bill address these matters it was through this particular research that it made it clear to us as well as our engagement with local councils and local authorities that something had to be done.Around 55 percent of New Zealand residents would like to see more restrictions placed on freedom camping and certainly in my engagements as well once again with local authorities and local government in some of the most beautiful places they talk about this ongoing challenge of cleaning up these areas because of the acts of irresponsible people. And so making sure that we can continue to support them with an evidence base and a research base with this particular bill has always been at the forefront of what we're trying to achieve here.The member Tim van de Molen asked about the time frames and about the length of time and also the numbers involved. So the transition is a two-year transition period—and that's always been quite clear—at which point we expect all self-contained vehicles to be certified under the new system.I did mention earlier in my first contribution that the Supplementary Order Paper introduces the ability to extend that transition period by up to two years if necessary—and there could be a number of complex factors as to why it might need that extension and to do it by Order in Council. But when working with the regulator here we're making sure that we've given enough time frame to be able to cater for any of those delays if they occur.What it also does is it sets out quite clearly the job that we all have to do to make sure that we educate and inform visitors through that period—for those who are wishing to certify their vehicle those who are looking towards doing so but also those of the general public who need to understand these to make sure that we can continue to report bad behaviour to make sure that we can continue to allow people who visit this country—and also domestic tourism markets—to travel more freely around this country and do so within the rules whereby they're respecting the environment the place that they visit and also the social licence that is gained and offered by community to places that are frequently visited by large numbers of people throughout the year.
Mooney JosephJOSEPH MOONEY (National—Southland): Thank you very much Madam Chair. Minister I was just interested in your response before where you said that it would be illogical for someone to have a fixed toilet and not use it. My question is: wouldn't it also be illogical for someone to have a portable toilet and not use it and why the difference? Because if someone has a portable toilet it makes I would suggest just as much sense for them to use that as it would a fixed toilet.Obviously there needs to be the right regulatory framework to make sure that people aren't taking the mickey and you know having a bucket or something as a portable toilet—it needs make sure that it's of a good standard. But my question is: why hasn't this bill addressed that point?And on that point there's a Supplementary Order Paper which is on the Table and I'd ask that the Minister has a look at it—Supplementary Order Paper 356 which has addressed this issue. It's been placed there under my name a proposed amendment which would replace clause 44 and make it clear that a vehicle is equipped with a toilet that is either permanently fixed to the vehicle and usable within the vehicle; or is portable and otherwise meets the requirements set out in regulations".So I would suggest that the Minister adopt this Supplementary Order Paper which would clarify this point and make it clear that some vehicles' non-fixed toilets can be certified as "self-contained" and that would be a sensible way I would suggest Minister of addressing this particular issue and making it clear that we want people to be using their toilets and their vehicles but also making it clear that there's no true distinction between a proper portable toilet and a fixed toilet. If people are reminded and responsible to use either they will use those.There is one other point I'll just briefly touch on. I want to make sure these decisions that we're making in this committee are based on evidence and not just based on an incidental observation here and there. The observation the Minister made of stopping and seeing some waste close to the road—well I understood the Minister's comment and the question is whether that was done by someone staying overnight or whether that was someone who was stopping trying to find somewhere where there was no public toilet available and using it and then carrying on in their vehicle.So we need to be making sure we address legislation towards an identified problem that's based on sufficient and adequate evidence. And I would ask the Minister: are we making decisions in this Chamber this afternoon on that basis or on the basis of an incidental observation without any evidence to really supplement or underpin the decisions that are made?"
van de Molen TimTIM van de MOLEN (National—Waikato): Thank you Madam Chair. Look I'm happy to take a call on this. I just want to give the Minister one quick example on his previous point about the irrational comment—or his perception that the comment or view was irrational—that Mr McClay made.I think it's quite plausible that there could be a scenario where someone would have a campervan with a fixed toilet in it but not want to use that fixed toilet—for example if they were hiring it and it had an additional cleaning charge to use that facility and so then they may indeed wish to avoid that cleaning charge by not using the particular fixed toilet in that vehicle. So I think that's quite a realistic example that Mr McClay was referring to that could indeed see someone not using that and looking to go in the bushes as it were.But look that aside I'm interested to ask the Minister a couple of questions around this self-containment certification authority and the process for getting that certification for a particular vehicle—in particular the initial process once this legislation comes into play. So I'd like the Minister to give us some insight into exactly how many certifications he believes will be needed and how long he thinks it will take for all of those certifications to be given or made and then how many self-containment certification authorities would be needed to ensure that those self-contained certifications can be issued by those authorities.So a few questions there: how many self-certifying authorities will be needed? How many vehicles are going to need to be given these certifications? What's the time frame for that? Is he confident that could be met—once the legislation comes into play that there will not be a significant lag where we therefore have thousands of vehicles that have been unable to secure the certification through no fault of their own simply through the fault of a lack of processing capacity within the system that he is setting up? And does he have an expectation around a time frame that would be appropriate both in the initial phase and then further down the track for the certification process to take place on any given vehicle? Thank you.
McClay Todd; Henare PeeniHon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua): Madam Chair thank you. Minister I see that you had a note and you mentioned that it's already an offence to not dispose of waste correctly but that wasn't the point that I was making. My point is—it's a very clear question I guess and this will clear it up to see whether the legislation or the Supplementary Order Paper that's been put in by you Minister or by the Government actually has fixed the problem or not. Is it against the law for somebody with a certified campervan who has a fixed toilet in it to not use that toilet and to go out and to defecate on the grass beside them? And is it lawful for somebody with a campervan that has a fixed toilet who uses it to freedom camp?Hon PEENI HENARE (Minister of Tourism): Thank you Madam Chair. Is it the responsibility of the health system to treat somebody's sunburn when the person owned a hat or owned sunscreen? The kind of question that the member is posing—it just seems irrational that somebody would own a vehicle with a fixed toilet and continue to do their business outside. That just doesn't make sense to me. And what we're trying to do here as I've continued to reiterate to the committee in this session is to make sure that we can stamp out this behaviour. We do it through utilising our councils in a regime that will make sure that these vehicles are certified and we've given time for that certification process to happen and for the regulatory framework to be built here. I've also mentioned that we have a very clear plan to make sure that the messages are being clearly explained to visitors and to people who travel the country to make sure that they aren't unwittingly caught by this particular legislation to make sure that we continue to stamp out the behaviour.
Henare PeeniHon PEENI HENARE (Minister of Tourism): If I can go back to one of the questions asked by the ACT Party member Aussie residents are not here on visitor visas so they would have entitlement of exemption as they are given a resident's visa for the time they're visiting here. Hopefully that addresses the member's question.Coming back to the Hon Todd McClay's contribution the Government has been quite clear over a number of years that we have supported local councils and local government to be able to invest in more facilities that can cater for visitor numbers and building infrastructure for example. I myself visited Mount Ruapehu some time ago to open one such area that had proper facilities. It also had Wi-Fi and it also had a very clear area where people were able to use the facilities but also stay there for the night. We're quite clear in supporting local councils to build their infrastructure through matters like the Tourism Infrastructure Fund. This creates more opportunities for people to do the right thing. It creates spaces where people can go along and can continue to have trust that the facilities they are using clearly do not break the law.What we do know is that the inappropriate disposal of waste is an offence anyway. So what we're trying to do is support councils not only to stamp out this bad behaviour but also to invest in those spaces so that people can continue to enjoy the freedom of travelling around this country can continue to go to those key tourism destinations that our many international visitors enjoy and our domestic tourism market can as well. The bill makes it quite clear that the penalties for committing this offence have increased from $200 to $400 just to send the right message to change the behaviour that we're talking about—the bad behaviour that we're referring to.Also Cabinet agreed to a tiered infringement fee regime. That's important as we look towards the way that we support councils in implementing this particular piece of legislation—the way that they enforce it and the way that we can continue to make sure that we stamp out this behaviour. It's going to take some time and we've made it clear in order to get the right messaging out—whether you're a domestic traveller or whether you're an international visitor those messages are clear to our people—in order to stop the behaviour that we're seeing and sadly is being cleaned up by local authorities.
Henare PeeniHon PEENI HENARE (Minister of Tourism): Thank you Madam Chair and can I thank the members for their questions. I acknowledge the work that the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee did in hearing a large number of submissions and also those who submitted to me directly via email and other means to bring their particular matters to the fore. There are a couple of things here that I would like to highlight to the committee and it is about the way that we try with this particular bill to deter bad behaviour. Members of the Opposition in particular will know that when it comes to something like this if you want to deter them and if you want to deter bad behaviour we want to make sure that there's a punishment that will deter that behaviour. What we've done here is we've looked towards making sure that there's a fit punishment for those who are caught breaking rules—those who are caught doing the kinds of deeds that were described and already accepted in this House as rather deplorable and disgusting—to make sure that that is the disincentive for people to do those kinds of things. I want to note too that what we know is that when it comes to camping for example I've already mentioned that you can camp on campsites and you can camp at a number of Department of Conservation sites that are available to the public. As the bill makes clear when it comes to private land you can also go there and you can still feel free to camp there as long as you've got the permission or if you own the land then that's all fair and well. I myself for example when I head up to the Far North to where my mother's family come from we literally camp there despite there being a house there. But there are facilities there. There are actual toilet and shower facilities but we enjoy having our own space of a tent. The research shows that tent-based freedom camping makes up only 4 percent of freedom camping in this country so we want to just make sure that some of the facts are out there. What we also know too is that in this country 85 percent of the domestic vehicles have fixed or fitted toilets already and I want to acknowledge those who do do these things responsibly who do make sure that they act in a way that the community can continue to support tourism activities within their community and that's absolutely fantastic. A couple of questions from the members continue to focus on portable toilet matter. What's clear is that fixed toilets are twice as likely to be used than a portable toilet. So if we're trying to change behaviour here it is my opinion and the opinion of this Government that this particular bill will do that.
McDowall JamesDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. Just in reference to the Supplementary Order Paper which is fairly significant and I'm thinking about the backdrop to this issue and very commonly we saw in the media issues of tourists behaving badly. Remember the French tourists who were a good case study. In addition to the media coverage we had the previous Minister Stuart Nash talk a lot about this particularly these immigration changes in section 5(2A)(a) in clause 6 which now clarify that a person is not freedom camping if they're on a visitor visa. I think it's not quite in those words but I think that's what it's trying to say. If we sort of take a step back doesn't this kind of undermine one of the big reasons for this bill in the first place? Because it does seem like a pretty reasonable carve out. And similar or connected to that a slightly different question: can the Minister then confirm that this does not apply to Australian visitors to New Zealand—tourists who come here because they don't get visitor visas; they get residency upon arrival. So there's a bit of discrepancy there. I'd like to hear the Minister's feedback on that.
Luxton JoHon JO LUXTON (Minister of Customs): Thank you Madam Chair. In response to that member's questions you'll be aware that there have been trials that have been carried out and they've been very successful so I don't anticipate teething issues at this stage. There are more trials planned as well though to ensure that any teething issues that may crop up are ironed out.As far as the cruise ships and what have you the question from the Hon Simon O'Connor he will be aware that there is just a bit more time needed to work with cruise ships and the Defence Force on the implementation of the arrival card at this stage.Parts 1 and 2 the Schedule and clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment.
Customs and Excise (Arrival Information) Amendment Bill — In Committee
McDowall JamesDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you. Last one I promise! I just wondered about the concern—and thank you for your answer Minister—around people who have changing circumstances; so they filled out their thing previously and now they're presumably on the plane or at the airport. Is the Minister anticipating teething issues in the sense that you come to the airport you've got your goods to declare or no goods to declare—you know are we suddenly going to have a third queue of people who are saying Well now I do. I've changed my mind or changed my circumstances."? Do we anticipate this to be kind of a bit of a rush of confusion? And will there be a sort of allowance an introductory period where enforcement might be on the more gentle side?"
O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): My last question just to help signal that. It's to do with new Part 6 being inserted into Schedule 1. The Minister will know long and short those vessels—sorry ships; I better get that right—that are under the control of our defence forces and ships operated by the international cruise business are being pushed out to October which is a different start date to everyone else. That's my understanding—if we can quickly check that. It's really asking again—yeah that's right. So the Act itself is coming into force on 21 June which is one of the reasons why we're moving at speed. But we're pushing out until the end of October this legislation applying to His Majesty's ships in the Royal New Zealand Navy and also those ships on international cruise business.Once again for the sake of the committee I think I know—I do know—the answer but I think it's useful to have it on record. So if the Minister could explain why there is a little bit of delay in what her expectations are particularly with international cruise ships or cruise business how this is going to manifest particularly for those who have not filled out that cards.So that's the second question. First why delay by a couple of months and second are we expecting effectively mobile computers laptops or machines to be at cruise terminals for those people who have not for whatever reason filled out their declarations while in transit?
McDowall JamesDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. Just a few more questions following on from the same line of questioning. It's regarding Simon O'Connor's query around $1000 and whether that's appropriate and will work as intended. If we recall as a House we discussed a member's bill from the Hon Jacqui Dean not so long ago where the advice from officials was that historically when the fines were increased it didn't actually dissuade people—that the impact of that was not so meaningful. So I just want some clarity here because it kind of feels like we've gone from in the case of the Hon Jacqui Dean's bill saying that that increase in fine wouldn't result in better outcomes and we shouldn't do it to suddenly in this bill saying that actually that's the right thing to do. So it's just a little bit of a contradiction.In addition to that it's obviously not a bad thing with the digitisation that changes can be made in a more timely manner in the words of the Minister—perfectly sensible—but I wonder if the Minister's received any advice as to how often requirements or the questions on the form may actually change like the rules around alcohol and other regulations because we're kind of moving from a very slow prolonged process now to suddenly things can be done kind of on the fly—for perfectly legitimate reasons I'm sure. But going from one mode of slowness to suddenly very agile—has there been any advice about how often we actually might get changes? That could be quite confusing for travellers.
Penk Chris; Luxton JoCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you very much Madam Chair. Just a brief question from me if I may following up on the line of discussion between the Minister and my colleague and friend Simon O'Connor. First though I begin by congratulating the Minister on her elevation to the ministry. She was already part of the executive of course being a Parliamentary Under-Secretary but she's been elevated to her new role and I congratulate her for that. In relation to the data sharing I think it's helpful that we've got on record the Minister's intention as aligned I think pretty well with the select committee report understanding about those data-sharing agreements not being compromised or affected in any kind of way. But my question is in relation to how long that data would need to be held and it might be that you're not able to answer the question now. I say that not to put you on the spot but if I can just express a hope—and the Minister may wish to respond—that data isn't held for this purpose any longer than is necessary because of course the purpose of the exercise is to make it easier to collect data easier to hold data and easier to share data. There are good reasons for that and it sounds to me as though members across the committee are on board with the idea that we want to make life easier for those agencies particularly the New Zealand Customs Service. But the flipside of course is that the easier it is to hold and share information the more easily it can be hacked or otherwise obtained by those who have no right to it and might have malicious intent either in the way they would use the data or by way of holding the New Zealand Government or the individuals to ransom. So I seek the assurance I suppose if anything that the Minister would agree that the data should not only be collected for the right purpose and shared for the right purpose but also held as long as necessary but for no longer. I think you know if we're going to require by force of law that people provide information—as to be fair was already the case I'm not saying that's a new element of the law; it's just we're doing it in a different way—then I think we owe those citizens and visitors the responsibility to retain that only to the extent that we actually need for these purposes.Hon JO LUXTON (Minister of Customs): Thank you for the question. The information can only be held for as long as the lawful purpose remains and the Act however only permits biometric information to be held for three years.
Luxton Jo; O'Connor SimonHon JO LUXTON (Minister of Customs): Thank you Madam Chair and thank you to the members for your questions. Firstly the in terms of the question raised by Mr O'Connor around the chief executive rules I am confident in those rules. They are secondary legislation which means that they are subject to parliamentary scrutiny and can be disallowed and they do allow for a more timely manner for things to be changed. For example if we have a sudden product that is disallowed or becomes an illegal substance he or she has the ability to make those changes necessary through a means that is quite scrutinised. It can be done in a more timely manner than should it be taken as legislation through the House.People who change their information or want to bring more additional things into the country than they anticipated when they filled out their online form before leaving the country they are leaving from do have the ability to make changes when they arrive in the country and as long as they do so they will be fine. The $1000 and $400 penalties align with other legislation and so there is no issue there. And—can you remind me of the customs question that you had sorry?SIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Sorry I'm not sure if it's appropriate protocol if I jump back up?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): I call on Simon O'Connor.SIMON O'CONNOR: It was more is the Minister confident that this amendment bill is not going to affect the memorandum of understanding that Customs has with the likes of IRD and the Ministry of Social Development?Hon JO LUXTON (Minister of Customs): Thank you Madam Chair. That is correct and I am confident in that. Customs as the member knows has memorandums of understanding that other agencies can obtain information from Customs. It's not a free-for-all; Customs cannot widely just go and share information about people. It must be requested of Customs in order to be shared.
Belich Camilla; Salesa JennyCAMILLA BELICH (Junior Whip—Labour): I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Salesa Jenny; O'Connor SimonCUSTOMS AND EXCISE (ARRIVAL INFORMATION) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteePart 1 Amendments about requirement to provide informationCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members we come first to the Customs and Excise (Arrival Information) Amendment Bill. We begin with debate on Part 1.SIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Thank you Madam Chair and may I as others have done in taking this first opportunity to speak acknowledge the terrible loss of life here in Wellington overnight and acknowledge in particular our fire crews and others for how they've handled everything.Secondly if I might I acknowledge the new Minister of Customs. I've said in the House a few times that there's nothing more exciting than a customs bill and secondly there's nothing more exciting than a new Minister of Customs! So welcome.A couple of questions from me because first and foremost as the Minister in the chair knows National is supporting this bill. We by and large see this as positive. But if we're dealing with Part 1—and I've got a few questions; about three of four if that's all right and I'll just go through one at time. I'm looking at new section 28A(2) inserted by clause 4—this is the information that's going to be provided—and it says here in the way prescribed by the chief executive's rules". Your officials will know that we have debated this discussed this long and at length—maybe add "boring—in terms of what the chief executive can or cannot prescribe. I'd just like the Minister here in this committee stage to give me and the committee some confidence—and this is no disrespect to the chief executive of Customs or the Ministry for Primary Industries or any other agencies but to be abundantly clear that there are in effect some guidelines some boundaries around what the chief executive can or cannot ask. The concern particularly for any members of the public listening is that while we move from this paper copy arrival card—we're all familiar with the little blue piece of paper we fill out; we're moving on to a digital platform—there were some concerns coming out of the select committee—although again I want to say that they were addressed—that the chief executive of Customs in particular could put in a whole lot of other questions that we might not deem appropriate to this debate as the Minister will know of whether we should be prescribing this quite explicitly in the legislation. We were told clearly there was not a need for it on the basis that the prescription by the chief executive is already within some sort of framework. So I wonder as the first question whether the Minister would be prepared to answer that."
Salesa JennyHOUSE IN COMMITTEECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members the House is in committee on the Customs and Excise (Arrival Information) Amendment Bill the Self-contained Motor Vehicles Legislation Bill and the Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill as well as the Grocery Industry Competition Bill.
Luxton Jo; Rurawhe AdrianAPPROPRIATION (2021/22 CONFIRMATION AND VALIDATION) BILLThird ReadingHon JO LUXTON (Minister of Customs) on behalf of the Minister of Finance: I move That the Appropriation (2021/22 Confirmation and Validation) Bill be now read a third time. SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.
Uffindell Sam; O'Connor Greg; Cameron MarkSAM UFFINDELL (National—Tauranga): Thank you Mr Chair. To the Minister: the horticulture sector is quite disappointed about the lack of response to Cyclone Gabrielle and the project coordination group report recently noted that between $650 million and $960 million would need to be injected around clean-up replanting income continuity financing arrangements and a whole lot of stuff. What further steps if any will this Government take to help those growers impacted by Cyclone Gabrielle? CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Sorry the Minister's time has—Hon Damien O'Connor: He won't let me answer. CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The Minister needs to seek leave to answer that question. MARK CAMERON (ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. Very quickly Minister—CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): I'm sorry but the time for this debate has expired. The question is That the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the annual financial statements of the Government for the 2021/22 financial year be noted. Motion agreed to.
Cameron Mark; O'Connor DamienMARK CAMERON (ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. Minister you and I are pretty collegial most of the time but I'm still trying to reconcile something to do with the national herd size. Go back to 2006 Minister when you know that we had peak numbers in terms of the animals in the animal ruminant sector. Do you reconcile today Minister given that methane is a short-lived gas we've got to have an honest conversation about what role methane has in terms of our emissions profile what its actual net warming addition is? Sir do you agree yes or no today that in 2006 we had our peak national animal ruminant herd numbers? We've subsequently fallen since then. That's the first question.On the basis of your answer on that what interventions are currently commercially available today to my people in the rural sector i.e. dairy farmers those in the beef sector or the sheep meat sector that we could use as interventions that will not actually have this—it's nothing more than an arbitrary tax and you know that I'm talking about He Waka Eke Noa. What interventions are commercially available excluding the development of genetic material which we know will take arguably six to eight years to be in the mean average herd or flock in New Zealand? Can you please for the sake of this House and anyone listening answer those very important questions?Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister of Agriculture): Thank you Mr Chair. Can I say plantain has been acknowledged as reducing nitrates and nitrous oxide; EcoPond which has been developed internationally and used by one of our major fertiliser companies to reduce the methane emissions from effluent ponds across the country; and selection—CRV and I know the Livestock Improvement Corporation too are identifying sires that have lower emissions. Those are three available now and there's work going on on bolus and other issues—as I say the Dutch technology which claims a huge reduction in methane from animals that ingest this on a regular basis and you can do that in an internal farming system. We haven't worked out how to do it in a pastoral system; that's why there's more work needed. So there are some opportunities. They incrementally add up to and I'm sure will contribute to the 10 percent reduction target that we have by 2030 and that's been acknowledged. In Ireland they've targeted a 30 percent reduction in emissions from farm systems by 2030; we've set a 10 percent reduction in methane.Can I just come back to the point around peak animals and methane; you see we had a lot more animals in 2006 and now than we had in 1900 or 1850. Global warming hasn't happened overnight and so what we've seen in the Hawke's Bay in my simple kind of physics is that we've had a warming of the sea and we have more moisture go up into the atmosphere and it's coming down. Atmospheric rivers: not something I had ever ever heard—I lived by the Buller River not an atmospheric river but now the Buller's more threatened by atmospheric rivers than it is the Kawatiri because of the warming and the effect that more moisture goes up and has to come down. That's the reality we face.
O'Connor DamienHon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister of Agriculture): Look thank you some very good questions in there I'll try and whip through them. The story? Perhaps the member Joseph Mooney doesn't come to enough of my speeches—and I repeat them within New Zealand and overseas. Believe me what you were referring to is something we should be proud of and we should be shouting it from the rooftops. And I do—I can promise you that.Can I just come back to—actually Joseph Mooney's a bit too young to remember but actually we had 70 million sheep in the 1980s and it's now down to 26 million. We're producing the same amount of meat and the same amount of wool; it's just that the wool's worth nothing which is a tragedy but I won't go on to that for the moment. He said we have a challenging 12 months ahead. I'd suggest actually—and the banks are saying as well the economists—the 12 months ahead look a lot better than the 12 months we've just been through because we've been through a period of excessive global inflation. The prices on most of the core inputs into farming are actually coming back which is great. As I said right early on it would have been hard to sustain that. And it's not $52 billion; it's $55 billion. You know $3 billion—nothing to sneeze about.And so the point about significant natural areas (SNAs) that he refers to—in fact SNAs were identified in the 1991 National Party Resource Management Act piece of legislation. And so what happened is actually some councils got on and identified where they were and some didn't. In fact now there's been an obligation to get on and identify.What has been seen as one of the biggest liabilities for the sheep and beef sector because they'll talk of about 1.4 million hectares and indigenous bush and some of it might be kānuka and mānuka—actually that's an asset not a liability. And the farmers—and there are many of them—have turned it from a liability into an asset. Where they thought they had to go on and keep clearing it as we did in the past they're now leaving it to grow to create mānuka honey and to sequester. Now we're working through and some—depending on when it was cleared pre- or post-1990—of that is generating significant carbon credits for those farmers that are letting it grow back. And that will be the opportunities for sheep and beef farmers into the future. Thank you.
McClay ToddHon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua): Thank you very much. Mr Chair thank you and I won't take my full five but there will be many questions from this side of the House. The reason for that is—on behalf of farmers in New Zealand what they want is short sharp questions and short sharp answers and they want solutions. They don't want very long explanations that are actually making it harder for them. So I have some direct questions to the Minister about what's happened over the last year. But going back longer than that for the time that he has been the Minister of Agriculture you're going to see all up and down the country farmers saying to anybody who is talking to them anybody that will listen that it is now harder than ever before to be a farmer. And it's harder because they don't get the recognition that they deserve—they need—from the Government and that more and more rules and regulations are being piled upon them. So my question to the Minister is: what did he do over the last year—or three or four years—to stop the excessive amount of rules and regulations that have been imposed upon farmers? More than 20 changes and counting and more that are piling costs on them many of which are not actually making the changes that the Government has said that they want to. So that's a first question. Second question would be: where is it that he as a Minister on behalf of farmers in New Zealand is asking questions around the Cabinet table about if these rules are necessary and what is the extra cost and the extra burden? Because today the cost on farm is greater than it has ever been at any time in the history of this country—it costs farmers more today to run their farms. They spend 20 to 30 percent of their time filling out paperwork to send off to this Minister and his colleagues and it's hard for them to do what we need them to do which is actually continue to work hard in the rural communities and export for us. And I want to give one example of this and here is my third question for the Minister: when he and his Government decided that there was a blanket rule for the whole country around winter grazing for animals on slopes of greater than 10 degrees did he decide at that time that that actually was necessary even on parts of the country where there was no environmental harm being done? And did he ask for advice to decide that up to 10000 resource consents that will be needed in New Zealand for farmers to be able to get on and just farm in areas they always have—where there isn't any environmental risk or damage—at a cost of $100 million was justified and was OK? And when we came out a short while ago and said we wanted to make changes around this to protect the environment and go on a catchment-by-catchment approach did he actually mean to say to farmers that these farmers need to understand that all the new rules and regulations that he and his Government are imposing on them are for their own good? Did he honestly think that actually they need a Minister of Agriculture that tells them they don't know what they're doing?
Rurawhe AdrianPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: Tēnā rā tātou. Petitions have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.CLERK: Petition of David Cumin requesting that the House does not appropriate funds that could go towards the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East petition of John Hearnshaw requesting that the House introduce legislation to limit light pollution.SPEAKER: Those petitions are referred to the Petitions Committee. Ministers have delivered papers.CLERK: South Canterbury District Health Board Annual Report 2021/2022World Trade Organization Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies Ministerial Decision of 17 June 2022 together with National Interest AnalysisMinistry for Pacific Peoples Long-term Insights Briefing 2023 Improving Pacific Data Equity: Opportunities to Enhance the Future of Pacific WellbeingFire and Emergency New Zealand Statement of Performance Expectations 2022/23 Amended March 2023.SPEAKER: Members I present the Register for Pecuniary and Other Specified Interests of Members of Parliament: Summary of annual returns as at 31 January 2023. Those papers are published under the authority of the House. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee on the Fuel Industry Amendment Billreport of the Environment Committee on the petition of Todd Mullerreport of the Primary Production Committee on the briefing to follow up on the inquiry into honeyreport of the Regulations Review Committee on the complaint about the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Practice Rules) Regulations 2008.SPEAKER: The bill is set down for second reading. The report of the Regulations Review Committee and the briefing are set down for consideration. The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of a bill.CLERK: Land Transport (Road Safety) Amendment Bill introduction.SPEAKER: That bill is set down for first reading.
Edmonds BarbaraHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister of Internal Affairs): Thank you Mr Speaker. Again I'd like to thank the speakers in the House today for their words of support and acknowledge those who have departed.This morning I was speaking to Major Joe Serevi from the Salvation Army in Newtown and I just want to leave these words—his words that he said to me this morning—To everything there is a season and a time to every purpose. A time to be born a time to die. A time to love and a time to hate." At this time we wrap our support and aroha around those who are affected. There will be a time for answers and we will respond."
Ministerial Statements — Loafers Lodge Fire—Newtown Wellington
Visitors — Australia Political Exchange Delegation
Edmonds Barbara; Shaw JamesHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister of Internal Affairs): Thank you Mr Speaker. To the question by the leader of the Green Party I have had numerous conversations with both our Prime Minister and other Cabinet colleagues throughout the day. I am being informed of the progress as the day progresses through Fire and Emergency New Zealand. It is too early to rule anything in or out and right now our focus is on supporting Fire and Emergency New Zealand and those who have been affected by this tragedy.Hon JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): My second question relates to the resourcing of those firefighters. Is she aware that only a few days ago the firefighters union had reported that Wellington's busiest fire truck was out of action for 58 hours due to a lack of staff and if so what is she doing to ensure that our firefighters have the resources that they need to keep people safe in emergencies like this?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister of Internal Affairs): Thank you Mr Speaker. I have confidence in Fire and Emergency New Zealand to make the best decisions about how when and where to respond. In the end no Minister or member of Parliament should try to substitute their opinion for the decisions of expert firefighters and search and rescue responders who have to make split-second decisions based on the information in front of them.Hon JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): Finally we have learnt today that many of the people who were living in this accommodation were in very difficult circumstances. What conversations is she having with her colleagues about what the Government is doing to address the underlying support needs of vulnerable people and secondly as part of this to build enough decent safe housing for everyone regardless of their circumstances?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister of Internal Affairs): First and foremost I want to acknowledge the number of support agencies who are at the Newtown Park pavilion right now supporting all those who have been affected. The Ministry of Social Development and other agencies are working closely with the Wellington City Council to respond to their needs right now and obviously will be looking to the future. We will work hard to ensure all those who have been affected will have a roof over their heads.
Shaw James; Rurawhe AdrianHon JAMES SHAW (Green): Thank you Mr Speaker. On behalf of the Green Party of Aotearoa / New Zealand and as an MP based in Wellington Central and just personally I do want to extend also our deepest sympathies and condolences to the whānau and the friends and the colleagues of those who have lost their lives this morning.Our thoughts are with those who have lost their lives and the residents who have lost so much as a result of the fire. It is a tragedy for those directly involved and for the Wellington community at large and our hearts do go out to those who are affected.I do want to acknowledge that those people who were affected by this were amongst the most vulnerable and marginalised members of our community and they deserve our respect and our support.I do want to acknowledge also the work of the firefighters and the healthcare workers who did an extraordinary job and who acted very quickly to ensure that this awful situation wasn't even worse and saved many lives.I am also very very angry because I do have a number of questions. And I do respect the calls of the last two speakers but when they say that there is a time that we should be asking questions I take a different view as well because the questions in my mind are: what kind of country are we that we allow this kind of thing to happen to our most vulnerable members of our community? What kind of country are we where those people have so few options in life but to live in substandard accommodation with a reasonable chance of lethality? What kind of country are we where we would not raise a building code because we're worried we might be accused of issuing a war on landlords"? I think: what kind of country are we where our firefighters lack or are at risk of not showing up with the most basic of equipment to be able to fight these kinds of events?Those questions do need to be answered I think in the fullness of time. But I do have some questions today for the Minister of Internal Affairs. Firstly has she had any conversations with Cabinet colleagues about the adequacy of the fire code and how fire safety requirements are applied to existing buildings and will there be urgent moves to improve the approach to retrofitting sprinkler systems?SPEAKER: Did the—David Seymour: Sorry does the Minister want to answer? SPEAKER: Does the Hon Barbara Edmonds wish to respond?"
Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. On behalf of ACT's members of Parliament I'd like to join this debate in support of the words of the two earlier speakers—the Hon Barbara Edmonds and Nicola Willis—offering our thoughts prayers and sympathies to those who have perished in this dreadful disaster.I say dreadful" because while New Zealand has its share of terrible tragedies there are few that can bring the dread of people perishing in a fire. So our thoughts prayers and sympathies are with those people as deeply and sincerely as ever. That extends with our condolences for those who have lost loved ones: brothers and sisters; parents mothers and fathers; sons and daughters; work colleagues; neighbours in the Newtown district—for whom this will be a terrible shock to wake up to this morning.We also acknowledge—as so often at times like this—that the emergency services in New Zealand are a group of people who time after time rise to the challenge instinctively know what to do and save many lives even at great emotional cost and scarring to themselves often. And we should be truly grateful to live in a country where the innate character of the people who do those jobs means the best of them comes out precisely when it is needed to rise to that challenge.I reiterate what we heard from the earlier speaker. There will be questions around the right policies and whether they were followed and whether there was wrongdoing or responsibility. But the time for those questions is certainly not today: it is when the full facts and evidence have been gathered by the appropriate authorities. I ask and urge—and I'm sure I don't need to—that all people involved in the political sphere respect the people involved in this tragedy and follow that course of events properly.Finally I reiterate our thoughts our prayers and our sympathies for those who have perished in this dreadful tragedy those who loved and lost them and those still dealing with the immediate aftermath of what happened in the early hours of this morning. Thank you Mr Speaker."
Rurawhe AdrianVISITORSAustralia—Australia Political Exchange DelegationSPEAKER: I'm sure that members would wish to welcome the Australia Political Exchange Delegation led by Senator Jana Stewart who are present in the gallery.
Salesa JennyTUESDAY 16 MAY 2023The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSHon JENNY SALESA (Assistant Speaker): E te Atua kaha rawa ka tuku whakamoemiti atu mātou mō ngā karakia kua waihotia mai ki runga i a mātou. Ka waiho i ō mātou pānga whaiaro katoa ki te taha. Ka mihi mātou ki te Kīngi me te inoi atu mō te ārahitanga i roto i ō mātou whakaaroarohanga kia mōhio ai kia whakaiti ai tā mātou whakahaere i ngā take o te Whare nei mō te oranga te maungārongo me te aroha o Aotearoa. Āmene.[Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom and humility for the welfare peace and compassion of New Zealand. Amen.]
Wednesday 17 May 2023 - Volume 768
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Charities Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Te Paati Māori 2; Kerekere; Whaitiri.Noes 44New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 74 Noes 44.