edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That urgency be accorded.Ayes 108New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.
12. Question No. 12—Building and ConstructionTIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato) to the Minister for Building and ConstructionQuestion No. 12—Building and Construction12. TIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato) to the Minister for Building and Construction: Does she stand by all her statements and actions regarding the construction sector?Hon POTO WILLIAMS (Minister for Building and Construction): Yes especially when I thank the members in this House for their support of the Building (Building Products and Methods Modular Components and Other Matters) Amendment Bill last night.Tim van de Molen: What steps has she taken if any to address the worker shortage being experienced right now in parts of the construction sector?SPEAKER: Order! I'm going to ask the member to relate that to a statement or action that the Minister has done.Tim van de Molen: Point of order Mr Speaker. It's asking what steps she's taken which is an action.SPEAKER: Well reinterpret it to say whether she has taken steps"—all right?—"and if so what?"Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Thank you Mr Speaker. We have progressed the Construction Skills Action Plan to build capacity and capability in the construction workforce. This is also why we're progressing the Construction Sector Accord a genuine partnership between industry and Government and that's working to fix many of the issues and challenges facing the construction sector. I'd note also that more than 100000 learners have signed up for the free vocational training and apprenticeships under the Targeted Training and Apprenticeships Fund.Tim van de Molen: So who is right: the Hon Grant Robertson who stated in relation to the workforce his ability to deliver shovel-ready projects that the construction sector can absorb; or Watercare and City Rail Link who say travel restrictions and significant local competition in the labour market are problems and they need a managed isolation and quarantine quota to bring in workers from Sydney?SPEAKER: Order! The member has got to relate the question to the member's responsibility. Tim van de Molen: Point of order Mr Speaker. That was directly in relation to the worker shortage that's been perceived and stated by numerous players in the industry and whether it can be met or not. Right now there is a shortage and the Minister has given an indication of a number of plans for the future but not now.SPEAKER: And the member has given comments from the Minister for Infrastructure and some unrelated party which may or may not be consistent but for which this Minister does not have responsibility.Tim van de Molen: Will she commit to advocating for her industry by supporting an immediate trans-Tasman travel bubble to secure the skilled workers desperately needed for the construction sector?Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I am an advocate for the building and construction sector a sector that I'm very proud to represent as Minister. With regards to the second part of that question it's probably a matter for Ministers who are in charge of immigration and those exemptions."
11. Question No. 11—CustomsGINNY ANDERSEN (Labour—Hutt South) to the Minister of CustomsQuestion No. 11—Customs11. GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour—Hutt South) to the Minister of Customs: What is Customs doing to support the recovery of the New Zealand economy from the impacts of COVID-19?Hon MEKA WHAITIRI (Minister of Customs): In addition to their border management role Customs makes a contribution to the recovery of the New Zealand economy from the impacts of COVID-19 through its economic recovery programme. Customs is helping to kick-start the economy by supporting the Government's trade recovery programme through work on free-trade agreements and APEC 2021 by progressing work on the Secure Trade Lane with Australia and by expanding its Secure Exports Scheme. Customs has helped 370 businesses recover from financial hardship through repayment plans and instalment arrangements for customs duties.Ginny Andersen: What is Customs doing to expand the Secure Exports Scheme?Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: Already supporting 133 New Zealand exporters Customs is actively boosting the scheme making it available for exporters who use airfreight and small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) who may be ready to expand their export footprint. Customs is working directly with Māori businesses to respond to their exporting needs through this scheme and making it easier for businesses to join the scheme. Customs is working to make members of the scheme succeed offshore through agreements with other countries with eight of New Zealand's top 10 export markets now recognising the Secure Exports Scheme.Ginny Andersen: How will the Secure Exports Scheme support businesses during the economic recovery from COVID-19?Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: As a member of the Secure Exports Scheme New Zealand exporters benefit from less delay at international borders reduced fees and costs and support when there is trade disruption. They can also benefit from recognition by customers and Government agencies as a secure trusted trader. Major markets such as China and the United States provide border clearance benefits to members. The New Zealand Institute of Economic Research has assessed that the international recognition of the scheme provides annual benefits of US$310 million in GDP to the New Zealand economy.
9. Question No. 9—Education (Pacific Peoples)BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Associate Minister of Education (Pacific Peoples)Question No. 9—Education (Pacific Peoples)9. BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Associate Minister of Education (Pacific Peoples): Fa'afetai tele lava Mr Speaker. What is the Government doing to support the education needs of Pacific learners and families impacted by COVID-19?Hon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO (Associate Minister of Education (Pacific Peoples)): The Government announced $12 million is available for the Pacific Education Support and Pacific Education Innovation Funds. This will support Pacific communities and learners and educators to lead design and implement innovative solutions that will help Pacific learners participate and engage more effectively and achieve successful educational outcomes so Pacific learners aren't left behind. Lifting success for educational achievements for Pacific learners is a key aspiration of this Government's Pacific wellbeing approach and one that Pacific parents and teachers strongly support.Barbara Edmonds: What does this mean on the ground for Pacific learners and families?Hon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO: It's game-changing and there's a number of examples of innovative solutions that are having an immediate impact on Pacific learners. In Manurewa for example a primary school used last year's funding to run an after-school learning innovation project using science technology engineering arts and mathematics for Pacific learners. These Pacific learners are empowered by a hands-on practical programme that is family-focused and fun. In the Waikato a Pacific provider is employing a full-time person to empower support and provide mentoring to 50 year 13 Pacific students from five local high schools and it's helping these students make the transition to tertiary education with confidence. In Auckland—I can go on Mr Speaker—SPEAKER: No.Hon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO: —the Anglican trust through a project named Moana Tautua used last year's funding again to place a Pasifika mentor in Auckland schools to work with Pacific learners impacted by COVID-19 and help strengthen their resilience so that those learners remained engaged in their educational pursuits.Barbara Edmonds: Why is the Government focusing support in this area?Hon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO: Pacific peoples are the youngest and fastest-growing population group in New Zealand and we'll need to support their educational achievements to ensure they fully realise their potential in supporting New Zealand's accelerated economic recovery. The Government's response is also based on the leadership direction from the Pacific communities themselves who told us during the fonos held in 2018 and 2019 that they wanted a dedicated Pacific education plan and support to help Pacific learners succeed. This Government is working harder than any other Government to lift Pacific wellbeing by collaborating across agencies and the community; having dedicated targeted funding; and trusting Pacific peoples to provide innovative educational solutions—far better than that lot when they were in Government.
8. Question No. 8—EducationHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 8—Education8. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Education: Does he stand by all his statements and policies on education? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Yes. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has he changed the Government's target of having just 70 percent of students attending school regularly since his statement: I want all kids to be attending school regularly and I won't accept a target that's below that."? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No not yet. It is one of the targets in the Ministry of Education's annual reports that I'm looking very closely at. As I canvassed with the member at select committee one of the problems with the 70 percent target is it refers to the number of half-days that a student attends school and there can be some justified reasons why students don't attend school that can distort the statistics—for example we do have some families that take their children away overseas for extended periods of time that has an impact on the attendance statistics. Sometimes those absences are justified. Hon Paul Goldsmith: How does he expect we can turn around declining literacy and numeracy standards across the county when somewhere between 30 and 40 percent of students do not attend school regularly? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Student attendance—regular attendance—at school has been an area of focus for this Government. The downward trend in student attendance started some time before we became the Government around about the time the last Government improved the attendance services. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why has the Government not released the attendance data from all four terms in 2019 and 2020 which his ministry said would be publicly available by the end of February? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I'm not sure why that information hasn't been released; I'm sure it will be very shortly. Hon Paul Goldsmith: How does he devote sufficient time and energy to the many serious challenges across the full education and tertiary education portfolios while also managing the Government's response to COVID-19? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Because I'm busy and conscientious."
7. Question No. 7—Commerce and Consumer AffairsJAMIE STRANGE (Labour—Hamilton East) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer AffairsQuestion No. 7—Commerce and Consumer Affairs7. JAMIE STRANGE (Labour—Hamilton East) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What recent announcement has he made about consumers who are accessing financial advice?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): We know many New Zealanders have been doing it tough financially due to COVID-19—for example a Commission for Financial Capability survey during the nationwide level 4 lockdown found that 66 percent of New Zealanders were financially exposed or in difficulty. This means it's more important than ever that Kiwis are getting financial advice that puts their interests first and that's why I'm happy to say that consumers seeking financial advice can be assured that their interests will be put first under the new financial advice regime that came into force this week. The new regime will give people greater confidence to seek advice that will help them achieve significant milestones in their lives such as saving for a first home or planning for retirement.Jamie Strange: What new requirements will financial advisers have to abide by under the new regime?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: A key requirement of the scheme is that all advisers must sign up to a new code of professional conduct which sets standards of competence and professional conduct. Advisers will also be required to operate under a licence granted by the Financial Markets Authority. I'm pleased to say that these changes will increase transparency by requiring financial advisers to disclose any conflicts of interest commissions they're paid and limits on the companies they advise on. Introducing a new financial advice regime has been a major undertaking and I want to thank the financial advice sector for their continued input into the development of an improved regime that will better serve the interests of people seeking financial advice helping them navigate difficult financial decisions and plan for their future.Jamie Strange: How will the new regime apply to advice received through digital channels?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Very good question. In this ever-changing digital world it's crucial that all people have the same protections whether they access financial advice from an individual adviser or through the use of artificial intelligence on a digital advice platform. The new regime has been futureproofed so consumers can rest assured that the same protections apply to both. By enabling digital advice the new regime will improve access to advice for people who might not be able to afford comprehensive financial advice. I'm very proud to be a part of a Government that puts people first.
5. Question No. 5—Social Development and EmploymentWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland) to the Minister for Social Development and EmploymentQuestion No. 5—Social Development and Employment5. WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What updates has she received on the progress of Mana in Mahi?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development and Employment): I'm pleased to share with the House that following our initial target of 150 placements in 2018-19 Mana in Mahi has now surpassed the 2500 placement mark; 89 percent of those who are active or have completed or have exited early are not on benefit. There are currently 1566 active participants 45 percent of which are Māori and Pacific. Retention has been a main focus with 76 percent remaining in the programme for 91 days or longer—1480 employers have taken on participants they might not otherwise have trained. I'm encouraged by the steady progress that we're making through Mana in Mahi.Willow-Jean Prime: How does the performance of Mana in Mahi compare to the Government's other employment programmes?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: In addition to the 2500 Mana in Mahi placements He Poutama Rangatahi has already supported 2275 rangatahi into employment education or training; 82 percent of those engaged were not in any at the time of enrolment. Yesterday Minister of Education Chris Hipkins announced that more than 100000 people have accessed free trades training with over 21000 apprentices benefiting through the Government's Apprenticeship Boost support. And if that wasn't enough Flexi-wage has kicked off aiming to support up to 40000 New Zealanders into work. Mana in Mahi is part of the Government's wider work programme to support better employment outcomes. We are backing—SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will resume her seat. We have had enough. I think it's fair to say that I've had representations to do with St Patrick's Day and also to do with the naming of questions as patsy questions" this morning. I agree with the individual who made the comment that they could be better described as "poodle questions".Willow-Jean Prime: How is Mana in Mahi contributing to outcomes for Māori receiving a benefit?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Happy St Patrick's Day Mr Speaker. Thirty-eight percent of all placements at the time of referral were Māori; 71 percent of Māori participants have been on the programme for 91 days or longer and have a training pathway forward. This is reflected in the gradual increase of Māori exits off main benefits and into work since 2017. Overall exits off main benefits into work were the highest since February 2000. Mana in Mahi is continuing to support more and more people into employment education and training helping to accelerate our economic recovery and lay the foundations for New Zealand to build back better.Hon Member: Well-groomed question.SPEAKER: By whom?"
2. Question No. 2—FinanceDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 2—Finance2. Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of Finance: What has been the impact of the COVID-19 response package he announced on 17 March 2020?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): A year ago today I announced the first COVID emergency economic response package and at the time I told the House that we would give our total commitment to protecting the health and wellbeing of New Zealanders. Our initial $12.1 billion economic response package included the wage subsidy extra support for the health system and the first phase of our economic recovery package. In that initial tranche and also in the further support we gave—as a result the wage subsidy has paid out $14 billion helping to keep 1.8 million New Zealanders attached to their work. I said at the time that the package would be about cash flow and confidence and that is what we have focused on in supporting New Zealand businesses and workers through COVID-19.Dr Duncan Webb: What are some of the other impacts of the 17 March package?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The 17 March package was the first step in our support for the economy. Since that first package we've continued to update and expand our support to ensure New Zealanders are kept safe from the virus itself and that their livelihoods are protected—that's included the leave support scheme the short-term absence payment and now the resurgence support payment. Also on 17 March last year we permanently lifted main benefits by $25 per week and doubled the winter energy payment for 2020 to support our most vulnerable. This was in recognition of the disproportionate impact that the recession that was inevitable that day would have on low-income New Zealanders and we continue to support them today.Dr Duncan Webb: What support did the package provide for exporters?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well the 17 March announcement last year put aside $600 million for an aviation support package in part to help exporters continue to operate as commercial flights to New Zealand dried up. Since May last year that support has enabled more than 6000 flights carrying over 120000 tonnes of airfreight worth $8 billion while at the same time restoring our airfreight capacity to 90 percent of pre-COVID levels. In addition more than 60000 people have returned to New Zealand on flights supported by the scheme—or 60 percent of the total number of people to pass through our managed isolation and quarantine facilities. I think it's unlikely that many of those journeys or the freight would have moved without that intervention. This has been a very significant part of helping our exporters continue to thrive through COVID-19.
Regulatory Systems (Transport) Amendment Bill — In Committee — Part 1
Salesa Jenny; Rurawhe AdrianHouse resumed.REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Mr Speaker the committee has considered the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Bill and reports it with amendment. The committee has also considered the Regulatory Systems (Transport) Amendment Bill and reports progress. The committee has also considered the Financial Market Infrastructures Bill and reports no progress. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Members the House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow.The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.
Court SimonSIMON COURT (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. To the Minister: on the subject of transport instruments and recognising that the Bus and Coach Association did make a high quality submission there was another submission made more recently by way of a burner phone to a Radio New Zealand journalist outlining some significant concerns that a number of organisations stakeholders were so concerned about that they weren't prepared to make those submissions to this bill for fear of being identified. Those organisations have claimed that the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) has not dealt with them fairly. You can put that to one side but what they've also asked for is for a far greater emphasis on professional development within NZTA for vocational training to train certifiers and others who would be subjected to these instruments and required to comply with them. So what this bill doesn't identify and we haven't heard about any subsequent legislation is how not only will the instruments clarify how to comply—and the Bus and Coach Association had a concern about that because they were concerned that bus and coach designs might simply be issued from head office in Wellington rather than relying on the experts the professionals who do this every day modifying and developing and building new buses and coaches and that includes things like your motorhomes as well as school buses and other commercial vehicles. So what they've asked for and what the whistleblowers have asked for through their communications from their burner phone to a Radio New Zealand journalist is that in consideration of this bill and of NZTA's functions—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Order!SIMON COURT: —would the Minister please respond to the question on training and development?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members the time has come for me to report progress.
Wood MichaelHon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): Look just responding to the member's questions which relate to very good submissions that were put forward that probably would have been a good debating topic in the second reading of the bill—but look let's have a bit of a talk about them anyway. I think that the point that the Bus and Coach Association is making there is in part a valid one which is that the regulatory landscape within transport is a complex one and entities who have to engage particularly commercially in this landscape do have a lot to juggle. One of my hopes with the process of creating transport instruments is that things actually become a little bit easier for those entities because one of the challenges that we constantly get told about at the moment by entities in the transport system is that if rules and regulations are out of date and if in part they are out of date because it is so difficult and cumbersome and time-consuming for agencies and for Governments to change rules and regulations the creation of instruments which will enable a smoother and quicker process to make sure that the regulatory regime is up to date is actually going to make things a bit easier for the Bus and Coach Association and other entities.So while it is true that there is a profusion of instruments—or will be—and rules and regulations they are all generally important they give clarity and they ensure safety in one of the most safety-critical regulatory areas. I think actually the instruments will if anything smooth things out and make it a bit easier for the Bus and Coach Association and other organisations.Look there is always a challenge in terms of regulatory agencies in terms of their ability to keep up and ensure that they are resourced. But I can give a commitment on behalf of this Government that we'll make sure that the Ministry of Transport and other key agencies do have the resources that they need and Waka Kotahi to fulfil their regulatory functions.
Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you Madam Chair. Just a very quick question: is the Minister concerned that there might not be any instruments relating to bus transport for a very long time and then a large number will all arrive at once?
Luxon ChristopherCHRISTOPHER LUXON (National—Botany): Listen it's a pleasure to speak on this bill and I just want to congratulate a new Minister on an outstanding piece of legislation. We would've loved to see it being called the Second Harbour Crossing Bill" or the "Light Rail Bill" or the "Let's Get Wellington Moving Bill" or the "Remove Congestion Clogging Up Our Cities Bill" but this is a fantastic piece of work first up. Can I just say we're very supportive of this very important practical common-sense legislation that we've got before us which is obviously doing important things—enabling transport instruments clarifying exemption and revocation powers minor regulatory governance and stewardship improvements.I guess in the spirit of Part 1 which is really about land I was very intrigued by the stunning submission from the Bus and Coach Association—the concerns that they raised in their submission where they said that they were worried that there was an issue around capacity in an under-pressure Ministry of Transport and New Zealand Transport Agency. They were worried about the cumulative effect of multiple instruments on the reliability of primary and secondary legislation and they were also worried about the inability of instruments to fundamentally deal with what they think are deficiencies in the primary and secondary legislation. So I'm just curious to see whether the Minister had any view on responding to the very important submission from the Bus and Coach Association."
McLellan TraceyDr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour—Banks Peninsula): Thank you Madam Chair. And I wanted to take this opportunity to ask the Minister a question specifically relating to a very narrow piece of this bill with regard to new clause 24B. And to provide some context to that question can I just firstly say I'd like to acknowledge and say a very special thankyou to John McLister from the Lyttelton Seafarers Centre for his tireless work delivering services to seafarers and his long standing advocacy of seafarers not only in the Lyttelton community in my electorate but nationally. John's advocacy led my good friends Tyrone Fields and Reuben Davidson to organise a successful petition to champion this policy proposal to fund welfare services for seafarers through their mighty Lyttelton branch of the Labour Party to our regional and then annual conference and see it then tonight included in this omnibus bill here in this House at this committee stage. So I just wanted to be able to acknowledge the hard work of those people at the grassroots who saw a need in the community and have I'm sure with great excitement seen that come to fruition.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Order! If I can just get the member to come back to Part 1 please. The part that she's talking about at the moment is Part 4.Kieran McAnulty: That's right. Thank John again.Dr TRACEY McLELLAN: Thank you John again. That's all I wanted to get in. We'll cut that thank you.
Wood MichaelHon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): Well the boats are certainly going faster under this Labour-led Government as we've seen today. We could perhaps have a more fulsome discussion on that when we get to Part 3 and 4 which do relate to maritime matters rather than Part 1 of the bill.Look in respect of Mr Penk's questions the wording in new section 168H and 168I is as I understand it relatively standard wording that relates to the procedures that not just the agencies who come under the ambit of this bill but many agencies have to go through before they consult before they make regulations. So as I understand it the processes would be relatively standard. The agency concerned—in this case Waka Kotahi primarily—will have a good understanding of the entities or community organisations who are affected by a piece of legislation. They would therefore make sure that they make reasonable endeavours to contact those organisations to give them an opportunity to respond to the proposed instrument or rules that are being made and to then take those views into account—so a relatively standard process that will probably not be unfamiliar to the member in terms of meeting the threshold of reasonableness in consultation.
Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): In referring to Part 1 of this bill I look at the general policy statement and it talks about maintaining the effectiveness and efficiency of the regulatory system and it also talks about supporting the whole-of-system view of regulation. If I look at this everything that I look at in here talks about more efficiency and speeding the process up. So I just wondered in light of the fact that this bill also covers maritime and given the events that we've had in New Zealand today is the Minister totally convinced that the changes in this bill will make the boat go faster?
Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you very much Madam Chair for the unexpected pleasure of being able to contribute. I did speak at an earlier stage of the bill and I note that one of its intentions is to avoid duplication so I'll try to make my contribution in that light and avoid repeating too many of my remarks from the previous excellent as they were.I wonder if Minister Wood can speak a little bit about new section 168H in clause 8 within Part 1 Procedures relating to transport instruments". If there's any guidance that he can give in relation to that it would be most helpful. I'm speaking about subsection (1) particularly—that's section 168H(1). In that we see that "The Agency or the Secretary must not make amend or revoke a transport instrument unless satisfied that all persons and organisations that [they think] appropriate have been consulted having regard to the subject matter of the proposed instrument" etc. So is there some guidance that the Minister can give please into how it's envisaged that such appropriateness would be deemed? Is there a set of factors perhaps whether that's—well I don't know. I shouldn't put words in the Minister's mouth. Why would I make his task easier? But no in all seriousness I think there could be a different range of ways that could be contemplated and if there's any advice he can give in that regard it would be very helpful."
SpeechREGULATORY SYSTEMS (TRANSPORT) AMENDMENT BILLIn Committee
Mahuta NanaiaHon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): It is true rates arrears have built up on Māori land to eye-watering levels. You only need to go to Māori land owners who are struggling with this issue and ask the question and they will tell their story. So you know this is more than a heartfelt approach; this is the reality that many Māori land owners are facing.And I could never really understand why over a long period of time several councils continue to adopt the practice of applying penalties to rates that had been unpaid for a long period of time. So the member makes a point about a fiscal black hole being created. In fact what happens for several councils in this situation is that this debt after a period of time will sit on the books as non-recoverable. So 100 percent of unutilised land is nothing; the economics are simple. What we need is land to be utilised so that some income can be earned as you know developed income earned and then rates paid. We are not in that situation with these lands. There's no fiscal black hole. These arrears sit on council books as non-recoverable. Money is not being lost because money is not being earned.That is the challenge is where we need to get into a space of ensuring that land can be used and then councils and Māori can have a real conversation about what's the horizon of rates that could apply to this land. And I think that it's important that we change up the conversation because this issue has been around for a long time.OK so what's the impact of the change? The change means that we're writing off arrears or we give the opportunity for councils to make the decision to write off arrears so that the forecast opportunity in use and the conversation space about what type of development could occur on that could be happening sooner rather than later. I really want to make that clear because I don't want there to be a pervading view here that this bill is about giving something to Māori and councils losing something. Councils who are in this situation know very well what the opportunity space is here. And I'm sure were select committee members able to point to some of the submissions or examples in their patch they might even point to those examples.
Luxon Christopher; Dean JacquiCHRISTOPHER LUXON (National—Botany): The question I've got is really around the one that we talked to before which is has there been any cost identified in a hard sense around the rates write-off and therefore what cost burden that gets shunted across to other ratepayers to pay. That's the first question.The second question fundamentally is having implemented this bill what does success actually look like and how will we measure it?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): No further calls? I'll put the question—Simon Court: Madam Chair?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Simon Court—just in time. Hon Members: Oh!CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): If members want a call—
Pugh Maureen; Dean JacquiMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I'll just make a small contribution to the committee stage tonight by asking the Minister in the chair Nanaia Mahuta—and I know this has been canvassed in other areas but I'd just like to bring a focus into other parcels of land such as Queen Elizabeth II (QEII) National Trust covenanted land marginal strips significant natural areas Schedule 2 wetlands. We've got family-owned land we've got trustee-owned land with multiple trustees. These seem to fit also into the same area where the land is non-productive because of the nature of it—it's exclusive. It's been fenced or protected or it's owned by multiple owners. So can the Minister please give some rationale for why we shouldn't also be capturing these parcels of land in this debate as well?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that the Minister's amendments—Hon Nanaia Mahuta: Oh no no—no no. Sorry I was just looking for the exact part of the bill Madam Chair sorry.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Well you should've called because I have started.Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): Look just to clarify—I was looking through the bill to find the exact clause but in terms of the policy approach what we wanted to ensure is that what applies to the QEII lands would equally be applied to whenua Māori. So we have extended the provision that applies to QEII lands to whenua Māori in a very consistent way. I apologise for the slowness of the response.
Mahuta NanaiaHon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): I disagree because this approach sits alongside the whole focus of certainly our Government's response to arresting the challenge of unproductive Māori land and it came in three parts. Firstly to have targeted amendments to te ture whenua based on a lengthy consultation of the previous Government and bringing forward actually the critical aspects that would make a difference immediately. We've done that.The second aspect was to introduce this particular provision which sat outside of te ture whenua remit and was highlighted through various consultations as a high area of concern and an impediment to developing Māori land so we are currently in that stage. The third part of ensuring that unproductive Māori land could be better utilised was to have access to finance because again while it sits outside of the remit of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act changes it was critical to ensuring that Māori had access to finance to be able to develop their land.So we've taken a different approach. It's not the one that the member was speaking to but again it's one that has enabled whānau Māori to be able to look towards the potential of their land and change some of the fundamental barriers so that they can become more engaged with the potential opportunity that they have sitting in front of them.Can I come back to the issue of a consistency of approach. Again this change is linked very critically to the bigger challenge that we had which was what could we do usefully to ensure that we could introduce changes that would help Māori move more into a development space and opportunity. So that was at the heart of our general policy intent. The point was also made around councils using rate relief already under the existing powers. Look I want to acknowledge those councils that are doing it but they're not doing it uniformly across the country in areas where you could actually make a critical difference. Interestingly a former member of this House from Northland actually provided some of the solution around why we're taking this approach too. Insights from the Far North District Council show that if we were able to generate a change such as this to initiate a different conversation then that would very much open up quite huge parcels of land in some districts to be able to be used in different ways to the greater advantage of the region. So I just want to acknowledge councils such as that who did initiate the type of change that we could learn from and improve in a more comprehensive way.
Muller ToddTODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): Thank you Madam Chair. I rise to say a few words at this committee stage. I thank the Minister for her willingness to engage on the questions in a respectful back-and-forth manner—appreciate it. Just listening to the Minister's answers to the good question from my colleague Christopher Luxon I felt that she addressed the rationale as she sees it from a policy perspective for reflecting on a more perhaps suitable from her perspective mechanism for Māori non-productive land but I do not believe she suitably addressed the question that Christopher Luxon posed with respect to non-Māori non-productive land and the fact that really if you are to apply a model or a framework to seek enabling of that non-productive land be it in Māori ownership or non-Māori ownership there should be a consistency of approach. And I feel that that specific question was still not addressed.The second issue that I'd like to put on the table sort of builds again on Christopher Luxon's comment around problem definition. In the second reading Minister we heard a number of speeches from those of us on the Māori Affairs Committee who talked to the fact that a number of Māori be they iwi or hapū in various guises have sat down with local government and reflected on the historic constraints of rates arrears on their particular commercial opportunities and have come to agreements with councils as to how the council could assist them in being able to deliver on those commercial visions through rate relief. And Minister that has happened and continues to happen today. So again we ask the question that if Māori land has attracted rates and has not because it's unproductive been able to pay those rates and those rates have accumulated over time—if Māori have the ability today to sit down with local government to work out mechanisms to write off those arrears and then partner with local government to create potential commercial models that work for local Māori then what is the problem definition?It remains our contention that this is a piece of the puzzle that has been prioritised by this Government because the broader challenge of actually fundamentally resetting the constraints on Māori land through te ture whenua reform has simply not been progressed and our view is that that is the greater focus. It is harder it is more complex acknowledging that but that should be the focus of this Government as opposed to what we would see Minister is tinkering around the edges creating a legislative solution when there is already a practical solution that local governments partnering with Māori use on an annual basis. Thank you.
Dean Jacqui; Mahuta NanaiaPart 1 Amendments to Local Government (Rating) Act 2002CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The House in committee on the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Bill the Regulatory Systems (Transport) Amendment Bill and the Financial Market Infrastructures Bill. Members we turn first to the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Bill. The question is that Part 1 stand part.Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): Just by way of introduction to the committee of the whole House stage can I firstly acknowledge the hard work and effort of the Māori Affairs Committee and their thorough consideration of the submissions that came before them. I very much appreciate their work and also the advice of the officials and the Parliamentary Counsel Office.The Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Bill has two purposes: firstly to support owners of Māori freehold land to engage with use develop and live on their whenua; and secondly to modernise some aspects of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 that are inconsistent with today's expectations of Māori Crown relationships. Part 1 addresses changes to the rating Act to support these two purposes proposes supporting the development of and provision for housing on whenua Māori our inability for a local authority chief executive to write off rates arrears provision of a statutory rates remission process for whenua Māori under development making unused whenua Māori non-rateable treating multiple blocks of whenua Māori that are used together as one rating purpose and allowing individual houses on whenua Māori to be rated separately from other houses and land uses on the block.Four proposals in Part 1 support modernising some aspects of the rating Act which are: removing arbitrary two-hectare land area limits from rates exemptions for marae and urupā; clarifying the current exemptions for marae meeting places and meeting houses; providing protection to whenua Māori made general land under the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1967 from the ratings Act abandoned land and rating sale provisions; and providing an obligation on trustees to provide evidence to support any claim they make that the income from land is insufficient to pay rates. The bill is the next stage of reform to address significant issues with the current approach to rating whenua Māori which in turn will support the objectives of the wider whenua Māori programme. Provisions supporting these two purposes including some consequential amendments are covered in Part 2. Can I say that while there may be representations throughout the House this should be dealt with through a comprehensive reform of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act. These Acts stand outside of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act which is why we're progressing them in the way that we are.
SpeechLOCAL GOVERNMENT (RATING OF WHENUA MĀORI) AMENDMENT BILLIn Committee
Rurawhe AdrianHOUSE IN COMMITTEEDEPUTY SPEAKER: Members I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Bill Regulatory Systems (Transport) Amendment Bill and Financial Market Infrastructures Bill.
Prime Willow-JeanWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland): E te Māngai o te Whare tēnā koe. Otirā tēnā tātou katoa. I'm pleased to be the last speaker in the debate tonight on the third reading of this bill; a bill that has gone through all stages under urgency. I have listened to the entire debate this afternoon and this evening and for those who might only be just joining this debate now it has been a really considered and reasoned debate across the House; all sides putting forward their really considered thoughts about why this is important why it is important that we do it under urgency and the reasons why there is broad support across the House—however not that of the Greens—for this to pass tonight.I often think about the speeches that we give in here. As a lawyer—and there are a few of us in the room—I think we were taught in statutory interpretation that sometimes the courts and lawyers will use it will come back to the Hansard and look at the parliamentary debates and try and determine what was the intent of Parliament when we were passing certain laws. So I often find it difficult to filibuster—you know if we are required to do it or those speeches that you give at short notice—because it doesn't lend itself to helping when courts get stuck and they are trying to figure out Now what was the intent of Parliament in that?" So I think it is really important.Chris Penk raised some really important points about the role of the legislature and the role of the judiciary and the separation of powers—again all things that we learnt about at law school. It is interesting to have been part of the legal fraternity and to now be in the legislature and making the law. So it is quite a profound moment for me.What is really clear is that there was a clear intent of the Parliament at the time for this law to apply retrospectively to those offenders even if they were charged and convicted after the passing of the law. I think that is why there is support across the House: because we as politicians were clear about that. However the point was made by Arena Williams prior to me that the Supreme Court and our courts can not imply that; it has to be explicit. So what we are doing here tonight is making that absolutely explicitly clear so that we don't have this situation again. It is a lesson to all of us that we can't necessarily foresee all of these things happening but that is why we do the process that we do—we give it that scrutiny we try and think those steps ahead so that we don't end up in this situation.So the purpose of this bill—and I am the last speaker in all three readings going through tonight; so it has been well traversed. But for those who might be joining late: the provisions clarify the intent of Parliament when it passed the Act in 2016 for the register to apply to all individuals who have committed a qualifying child sex offence irrespective of when that offence occurred. It is important that that bill passes tonight because we actually are in the situation where some have come off the register and potentially a whole lot more will. So I do not want to prolong the debate any further. I commend the bill to the House."