edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Chen NaisiNAISI CHEN (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. I find it really interesting how the other side—or the Opposition—has forgotten the cost of decommissioning the Tui oilfield. Let me reiterate to this House and remind the House and everyone listening that the Tui oilfield costed taxpayers $155 million. That is $155 million that we will never get back. That is hard-earned taxes of New Zealanders that we have to put into decommissioning the oilfield and there are plenty of other oilfields in this country that we need to look into decommissioning if it wasn't for this bill being passed. One hundred and fifty-five million dollars—how many more $155 million do we need to spend decommissioning all of the gas- and oilfields in this country?Enough is enough and that's why we need to legislate this bill. I absolutely do not accept that the select committee process was by no means a collaborative or one that we went into with open mind. In fact the Minister in her speech had touched on all of the different terms in the bill that we have now actually adjusted because of the select committee process. I want to thank all of the submitters who came into our select committee those who are experts in the field. Look I really have to say that you guys are all great advocates for your industry but unfortunately we do have to have a balance of approach to this. We need to make sure that we are good keepers of the taxpayers' money at the same time while regulating industry. And so all of the little changes that we've made for instance directors who if you're no longer serving on that board you are no longer criminally liable—all of these little changes including to the Minister's discretionary powers have given more clarity because of the Regulations Review Committee. All of these changes were because the select committee process had worked. So I thank all the submitters. I thank all of our advisors. This is a great bill that is saving taxpayers' money. I commend it to the House.
Halbert ShananSHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote): Thank you Madam Speaker. Sadly can I open this week by saying there is nothing worse in this House than being Invercargill-splained" by the member Penny Simmonds or in the first speech of the day from the Opposition being "Bish-splained" when we stand here and I stand here this afternoon as an Aucklander and somebody that has sat in lockdown since 17 August. Can I acknowledge every other Aucklander that is in this House this afternoon.What's worse is that my fellow member from the North Shore Simon Watts also criticises this Government's effort but has failed over those three months to even lift a finger to help lift vaccination rates on the North Shore and lift testing rates. These are the things that a local MP does in order to help the efforts. This bill—[Interruption]ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! We'll just calm things down a bit.SHANAN HALBERT: Thank you Madam Speaker. Speaking calmly this bill is a public health response and what we've forgotten in this discussion this afternoon is that in Auckland for those of us who have been locked down since 17 August there have been 6000 cases of COVID-19. Can I remind the House that on 17 August we had something called the Birkdale cluster. It all started with the Birkdale cluster and we saw rapid growth of COVID-19 across Auckland's North Shore and then out to Auckland and particularly out to our most vulnerable communities in South Auckland. That is the reality that we have lived in.What this bill does is adjust our laws and our response to ensure that the experiences that us Aucklanders have faced over the past three months—people protesting can I remind us laws that haven't kept people staying home which doesn't support the public health effort that we've been trying to achieve. I'm very very proud that we have continued to vaccinate—vaccinate vaccinate vaccinate; all of us. We are part of the effort to lift vaccinations as a part of Super Saturday. I didn't see my North Shore colleagues at Super Saturday can I just say but now at Waitematā DHB we are in a very very good position—93 percent of first doses; 86 percent second doses. Without vaccination as Aucklanders we cannot move. I commend this bill to the House."
Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Thank you Madam Speaker. Kia orana. I rise as a member of the Health Committee to speak in support of this bill. I want to reflect on the contribution of my colleague Sarah Pallett because I think she put it rather succinctly and ideally spot on and that is: what is the purpose of this bill? Fundamentally when the Minister and when the Director-General of Health is looking to make orders exercise discretion under the legislation they are doing that in order to keep the community safe to keep our community safe. And fundamentally that's what this bill is about.The select committee spent some time looking at this bill and there are a number of changes that have been selected and aspects of clarity as well. One is around the restrictions on the movement of people in managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) facilities and ensuring that what is captured there in new section 11 set out in clause 7 includes those in self-isolation; so it widens the definition. Another when we look at the select committee report is around the level of support available for those in self-isolation opportunities because while this bill provides an opportunity for an internal complaints process for those in MIQ there is a different approach for those that are in self-isolation situations. So you'll see in the select committee's report to the House that there is an expectation that there would be timely responses for those who perhaps have a complaint to make to ensure that that is considered in a timely fashion.The other aspect that I want to briefly touch on is around clause 12 and it's extending the power to stop motor vehicles and people at checkpoints and roadblocks. I just want to acknowledge the good work that our Māori wardens and our Pasifika wardens do in our community because they are mentioned specifically in the bill. We've all had our experience in a positive light in that sense even more recently and so it's good to see and to hear at the select committee that there is a level of training so that there's comfort there. So I'm delighted to be able to commend this bill to the House.
Pallett SarahSARAH PALLETT (Labour—Ilam): I'm glad you're looking forward to it Mr Seymour! Thank you Madam Speaker. I was going to rise and go through the finer points of one of the amendments that the select committee had suggested but I thought before I did it would be a really good idea to a little teeny bit of the why?" because I think when you're looking at legislation why you're doing it in the first place is a really good idea.So what I think is that any Government's primary responsibility is to keep their people safe. That's their primary job is to maybe stop them dying. So let's look at the facts: in the UK 165534 people have died with COVID-19 as the cause of death. If we do a little bit of basic maths and adjusting for population that would mean 12353 New Zealanders would have COVID-19 on their death certificate as a cause of death. Now the 35 that we've lost is a complete tragedy and I'm never ever going to minimise the effect on their whānau or of the people who love them.And Mr Watts I'm sorry to hear that you haven't been able to see your family for 91 days; it's very sad and I appreciate that the sacrifice is really huge. I haven't seen my dad for two years and it's going to be some time before I do; so I really do understand the frustrations—I understand the frustrations. My heart goes out to those businesses who've been affected. But those 12300 people those are the reason they are the reason why this Government has been taking the action it has and why it has been so successful and I'm proud to stand here today in support of this bill and commend it to the House."
McLellan TraceyDr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour—Banks Peninsula): Thank you Madam Speaker. As a member of the Health Committee we considered several issues in relation to this bill and I think there's two points that are worth highlighting.The first point is the bill increases the maximum penalties that can be imposed for a breach and I think it is worth highlighting because I don't think that we can overestimate that a breach of a COVID-19 order can cause huge harm and put all of our hard work at risk. And to date despite some of the protestations across the room we have had one of the most successful responses to COVID-19 in the world by whichever metric you choose to define that—certainly by mortality rates certainly by the low number of cases let alone the buoyant economy and let alone the low unemployment rate and they all prove this. So there should be significant infringement fees and fines for those willing to purposely or repeatedly breach those very measures that enable our success.Secondly the issue is about suitable precaution and preparedness. Should we face a severe outbreak and a significant resurgence of the virus one that threatens to overwhelm our public resources then I'm sorry it is all hands to the pump and people very rightly expect the Government to do everything possible to keep them safe as we've done to date. This bill allows the Government to use all of our testing diagnostic testing capacity by yes requisitioning some consumables or yes requiring that private testing labs focus solely on COVID testing bearing in mind that the bill also provides for suitable compensation and payment for service. Furthermore these particular orders as the Minister said are not routinely used and the threshold is incredibly high. It's for very serious risk for a limited time. People do expect that we're prepared if we need to be and testing remains one of our most important tools. I commend this bill to the House.
Craig LizDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. So since the bill was passed in May last year the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act has provided the framework for reducing the spread of COVID-19 in the community. But moving forward it's going to be important that we have the flexibility that we can adapt our approach and what this bill does is allow us to do that. But what I'd like to do is just talk to a couple of the changes that we've made as a select committee because we did receive some feedback and we have made some recommendations about changes to the bill. I think as already spoken about what the bill did was significantly increase the maximum infringement fees for those breaching orders and basically they rose from $300 which wasn't seen as particularly a disincentive up to $4000 for individuals and $12000 for other persons.But what the bill also allows for is what the Minister has referred to as a sliding scale. It's basically regulations to be made which allow different penalties for different infringement offences because it was never actually intended that that maximum level for the fee would apply to all offences but to only those that cause the maximum amount of harm in the community. But what we heard were some concerns that basically what that high level of fees might do is entrench some inequities that were currently in the justice system. So what we've done as a committee is looked at some extra protections that we could put in place. One of them is making sure that the Minister recommends the regulations be made but also to specify in the bill some of those things that the Minister might need to do to consider before doing so. One of them is to make sure the Minister considers the severity and impact of those breaches but also basically thinking about the appropriateness of the penalties for some of those particular groups that might be impacted—and then finally also thinking about what comparable offences there might be when you're looking at other legislation. So it's really important to have those protections there.We've also added some changes that would basically make it quite clear around the use of contact tracing information and that it shouldn't be used for other purposes than what it was intended for which is a public health response. We've recommended some penalties in that area. But this is really an important bill that allows us to have that flexibility and to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the community. I commend this bill to the House.
Deputy Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security — Appointment
Hipkins ChrisDeputy Inspector-General of Intelligence and SecurityHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That pursuant to section 164 of the Intelligence and Security Act 2017 this House recommend to Her Excellency the Governor-General the appointment of Mr Graeme Ian Speden as the Deputy Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security for a term of three years.Motion agreed to.
Offices of Parliament — Office of the Controller and Auditor-General—Appointment of Auditors
Hipkins ChrisOFFICES OF PARLIAMENTOffice of the Controller and Auditor-General—Appointment of AuditorsHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That pursuant to section 38(1) of the Public Audit Act 2014 the House appoint PKF Goldsmith Fox Audit as the independent auditor to audit the financial statements accounts and other information of the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General for the financial years ending 30 June 2020 30 June 2023 and 30 June 2024. There was a brief discussion about this at the Business Committee. Of course while I'm the person bringing the recommendation to the House this is the recommendation of the Officers of Parliament Committee. There are only a limited number of auditors who could possibly do this work. Most significant audit firms do work contracted by the Office of the Auditor-General and therefore it would be a conflict of interest for them to themselves be auditing the Office of the Auditor-General. When previous processes have attempted to run a tender for this work to take place it has by and large been relatively unsuccessful. In this case the incumbent auditors the current auditors PKF Goldsmith Fox Audit are happy to continue in that role and that is the recommendation of the Officers of Parliament.Motion agreed to.
Hipkins ChrisPARLIAMENTARY SERVICE COMMISSIONMembershipHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That under section 15(1)(d) of the Parliamentary Service Act 2000 the Hon Michael Woodhouse be appointed as a member of the Parliamentary Service Commission.Motion agreed to.
Woodhouse Michael; Mallard TrevorQuestion No. 5 to MinisterHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Point of order. Thank you Mr Speaker. I regret not raising this at the end of question No. 5 but in your reflections on today's question time I wonder if you would review whether answers by Ministers that led to disorder were consistent with or in breach of Speaker's rulings 191(1) and (2).SPEAKER: I'll certainly have a look.
Mallard TrevorPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: No petitions have been presented. No bills have been introduced. Ministers have delivered papers.CLERK: 2020-21 annual reports of Callaghan Innovation New Zealand Capital Growth Partners and Mercury NZ Limited2021-25 statement of intent for the Inland Revenue DepartmentGovernment response to the interim report of the Regulations Review Committee on a complaint about the Education (Early Childhood Services) Regulations 2008.SPEAKER: Those papers are published under the authority of the House.Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Reports of the Petitions Committee on the petitions of Degu Geddebo Joanna Spratt New Zealand Taxpayers' Union Patrick Dingemans and Paul JacksonReport of the Primary Production Committee on the petition of Jen HydeReport of the Regulations Review Committee on the examination of COVID-19 orders presented between 21 and 28 October 2021Report of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee on the report of the Controller and Auditor-General New Zealand Transport Agency: Maintaining state highways through Network Outcomes Contracts.SPEAKER: The COVID-19 orders and the report of the Controller and Auditor-General are set down for consideration.
SpeechTUESDAY 16 NOVEMBER 2021The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSADRIAN RURAWHE (Deputy Speaker): Kia tau anō te rangimārie ki a tātou. Kia inoi tātou. 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 Kuīni 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. Amene.[Allow peace to prevail over us once again. Let us pray. Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the Queen 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.]
COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee
Rurawhe Adrian; Salesa JennyDEPUTY SPEAKER: I declare the House in committee for consideration of the COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2) the Crown Minerals (Decommissioning and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and the Commerce Amendment Bill. HOUSE IN COMMITTEECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The House is in committee on the COVID19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2) the Crown Minerals (Decommissioning and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and the Commerce Amendment Bill. COVID-19 PUBLIC HEALTH RESPONSE AMENDMENT BILL (NO 2)In CommitteePart 1 Amendments to principal ActCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): We come first to the COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2). The question is that Part 1 stand part.
Incorporated Societies Bill — Second Reading (continued)
White HelenHELEN WHITE (Labour): I speak in support of the Incorporated Societies Bill. I commend this bill to the House.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
Rurawhe AdrianINCORPORATED SOCIETIES BILLSecond ReadingDebate resumed.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Members prior to the debate on the current issues and priorities we were debating the second reading of the Incorporated Societies Bill. Simon O'Connor had the call and he has 18 seconds remaining should he desire. If not we'll go to call number—Hon Member: Mr—DEPUTY SPEAKER: No you're not Simon O'Connor. I call Helen White.
Salesa JennyHouse resumed.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Mr Speaker the committee has considered a special debate on current issues and priorities and reports progress. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
Special Debate — Oranga Tamariki
Hipkins ChrisHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That the committee report progress.Motion agreed to.
SpeechHARETE HIPANGO (National): Thank you Madam Chair. I think it's abundantly clear that the Minister and his ministry—which I commend for the efforts and the work that is done by the workers within the ministry—have made a commitment for the transformation. Again I put the question to the Minister which has been evaded at least three times now: in terms of fiscal commitment does the Minister consider that the fiscal commitment in the Estimates is on an equitable basis to meet the needs of Māori children in State care?
Davis Kelvin; Salesa JennyHARETE HIPANGO (National): I posed a question to the Minister this evening and the committee and members of the public who may be listening in are still awaiting a response. The question was along the lines of the commitment that the Minister has made to partnering with our communities and the Minister has also made a commitment to accepting and endorsing all 25 recommendations of Te Kahu Aroha. Recommendation 19 is that of adequate and equitable investments in Māori collectives and communities." I've stated to the House this evening and put it to the Minister: does he accept that the allocation of 25 percent $100 million of the $400 million that has been committed to community partnership is an equitable fiscal allocation aligned and on par with the number of children Māori children in State care?Also before I conclude I think it's important and it would be appropriate and becoming of a Minister for a department for children to be the exemplar in how women are treated. I know that as a lawyer who was advocating for Māori mothers and for non-Māori mothers of children it was evidenced time and again how they were spoken over by people working within the agency—unbecoming inappropriate. And I would invite the Minister to reconsider how he conducts himself in that position of responsibility as the lead for the Ministry for Children.Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Children): Just very quickly—in terms of the partnership I don't know how much further I can explain: the whole future direction of Oranga Tamariki is working in partnership with communities and Māori. I don't know how much more explanation or how much more I can emphasise and yet she keeps asking these questions about "will I commit to partnership?" That's the whole point of what we're doing. That's the whole change: empowering communities and Māori. CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The time for this particular debate—Hon Member: Four minutes on the clock.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): I call on Harete Hipango."
Chhour Karen; Davis KelvinKAREN CHHOUR (ACT): Can the Minister lay out the goals he set for Oranga Tamariki's performance? Are they just one at six months one at five years or are there other goals he didn't mention? If there are other goals what are they and when are they set for?Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Children): That's easy. Look there is a future direction strategy. It has a number of objectives covering from now until five years. I don't have it on me. I haven't memorised every single element of the plan. But I'm happy you know to discuss it. It's no big secret. The fact is that we're moving ahead in a direction that will give decision making resources to communities working in partnership to make sure that we get the very very best outcomes for our most vulnerable children.
Davis KelvinHARETE HIPANGO (National): Well it is reassuring to hear that the Minister in the chair Kelvin Davis has made a commitment to partnering with the communities because I put it to the Minister again in evidence that he gave to the select committee on 30 June that there is a $400 million commitment provided across the country; $100 million—that is 25 percent—goes to Māori providers right now. Minister you have also put on the record that 68 percent of children in State care are Māori. You have also indicated in the strategic planning and accepted all recommendations from your ministerial advisory group about the importance of equitable investment. So Minister could you please answer: if 68 percent of the children in State care are Māori and only 25 percent of the budget allocated across the country goes to Māori providers right now how is that equitable?Further Minister I think the record needs to be clarified and clear: you gave in your speech or opening statement this evening that the Independent Children's Monitor is not about new structures not about bureaucracy. However you have confirmed on advice Minister—which as the Minister for Children you ought to know because you are the proponent for an Independent Children's Monitor. You are the proponent for the bill that has been introduced to the House with the oversight of Oranga Tamariki and the establishment of a new Children and Young People's Commission. The Minister for Children ought to know that in commending and recommending this new structure it is another bureaucratic Government department.Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Children): The member is totally confused. I didn't mention anything about the independent child monitor but there are other political parties in this House who wanted this big bureaucracy separate from Oranga Tamariki. That is what I was talking about. She's totally gone off on another tangent on another planet somewhere. I was not at all referring to the independent child monitor. The member has this habit of standing up and under the guise of asking a question going down these garden paths and these trails and totally confusing everybody that's listening and basically invents and puts words into people's mouths that were never said. It's absolutely mind-boggling that she can basically invent a Hansard for me. So—Harete Hipango: Point of order Madam Chair—point of order. For the Minister to suggest that I'm inventing or I'm fabricating is really bordering on an allegation or an assertion that I am not making a statement of fact nor that I am telling the truth. I invite the Minister to reconsider because Hansard will evidence what has been recorded in the Chamber this evening.Hon KELVIN DAVIS: In reply to that no I'm not going to reconsider. This was what I said right at the outset: the future direction is not about new structures bureaucracies jobs pay authority and people or organisations jockeying for position. Nowhere in that did I mention the independent child monitor.
Davis KelvinHon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Children): Again I'm aware of time constraints so I'll try to give fairly brief answers. To Harete Hipango her question asking whether I will reconsider my approach to partnering with communities. The answer is no". If the National Party doesn't believe in partnering with communities I think that they need to—Chris Bishop: That's not what she asked.Hon KELVIN DAVIS: That is exactly what she asked and the answer is no. We will be partnering with communities and with Māori. I think the member who's having a bit of a "waa waa waa" at me over there he needs to actually read the Hansard because that is exactly what she asked me.I agree entirely with Jan Logie about the loss of trust and that Oranga Tamariki has and other Government agencies have a huge amount of work to do to regain the trust of people. I've been saying to Oranga Tamariki staff that we will start to regain the trust of people of whānau when they see our social workers our staff actually going out and fighting for them advocating for them on their behalf to get better services from other Government agencies and when we start seeing the results too.The devolution question: definitely the devolution of resources in decision making needs to go to communities which is again why I question what Harete Hipango asked. That's essential. It comes down to the engagement with communities and the relationships that will be formed with them. Again Harete Hipango said something about the independent child monitor—that is a departmental agency; I have been advised that it is a departmental agency.To the member Karen Chhour's question: work has started. We have a three- to five-year plan. It has goals for zero to six months—it has goals out for the five years. So that is in place. Work has started on addressing those goals."
Chhour KarenKAREN CHHOUR (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. I just want to remind you—around the select committee on votes Oranga Tamariki the conversations we had during that select committee. We were talking about how there's been many many reviews in quite a short time frame and I asked you you know: when are we going to see some action? I asked the Minister Kelvin. And I was told the time for reviews and sitting around having chats is over. It's time for action. And when asked Well have you got a time frame?" he was "When the Ministerial Advisory Board report comes out." You weren't able to say in two months three months six months nine months 12 months—this is where Oranga Tamariki is going to be. The report that you were talking about in select committee has been released; it's dated July.So Minister we are now four months later from when this report was ready. Where is Oranga Tamariki now and where is it going to be? Have we got time frames put in place where we are going to set targets each month and reach them?"
SpeechHARETE HIPANGO (National): Whilst the Minister is turning his thoughts to providing answers to the questions that have been posed I have an additional question. Where the Minister made the statement that The independent child's monitor is not about new structures or bureaucracy." then why is it Minister that under questioning of the Social Services and Community Committee on 21 June as is recorded in Hansard an answer that you gave to Ms Logie's question "The independent monitoring not being truly independent." the Minister's answer is "No not at all. So the independent monitor will become a departmental agency." So Minister could you please confirm what it is whether it is in fact another departmental agency which is a new structure in addition to the decommissioning of the Office of the Children's Commissioner or is it not about new structures in bureaucracies? There is an inconsistency in the statement that you've just made in the committee this evening to that which you gave in evidence before the select committee on 30 June this year."
Davis KelvinHon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Children): Thank you Madam Chair and I'd like to thank the member who's just resumed her seat Angie Warren-Clark for the great job she's doing chairing the Social Services and Community Committee. Look as we all know Oranga Tamariki and its predecessors over probably the last 30 or 40 years haven't exactly covered themselves in glory when it comes to caring for our most vulnerable children. The reason being or one of the reasons is that Oranga Tamariki and its predecessors put themselves at the centre of the system and everything revolved around them. That's changing and as I've said to Oranga Tamariki our children and their wellbeing need to be at the centre and at the heart of everything we do. So the ministerial advisory board did produce a report Te Kahu Aroha looking at changes that need to be implemented. It complemented a number of other reviews that Oranga Tamariki has undergone over the last few years. And to cut a very long story short the results are that decision making and resources are going to be devolved to communities and to Māori because I believe firmly that communities and Māori know what's best what the solutions are for their own children. Secondly we're going to also improve the social work practice to make sure that the practice that those children experience from Oranga Tamariki staff is up to scratch and also that we all do our part in the prevention of harm coming to children in the very first place. I'd rather be the ambulance at the fence at the top of the cliff rather than the ambulance at the bottom. So that in a nutshell is the future focus and where our budget commitments will lie to improve the outcomes for our most vulnerable children. One of the things that the future direction—and we have a plan a three to five-year plan for the future direction of Oranga Tamariki. What that plan is not and what the future direction is not because I've heard calls from certain sectors of the community and of society is it is not about new bureaucracies and new structures. It's not about jobs or pay or people trying to secure authority. It's not about organisations jockeying for positions. The future of Oranga Tamariki and the future direction to ensure the wellbeing of our children is in the hands of our communities and Māori. So I'll leave it there. There is a bit of a time constraint I'm told so I'll listen to the speakers and their questions and I'll try to answer a group at a time.
Salesa Jenny; Warren-Clark AngieCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Thank you. We will now move on to the next part of the Estimates debate. If we can have the Minister for Children in the chair.Oranga TamarikiANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Chairperson of the Social Services and Community Committee): Thank you Madam Chair. I rise for the third time tonight as the chair of the Social Services and Community Committee to discuss the Estimates of Vote Oranga Tamariki. The Minister for Children is responsible for nearly all the appropriations in this vote which is administered by Oranga Tamariki. We discussed the vote with the Hon Kelvin Davis as the Minister for Children. Vote Oranga Tamariki is approximately $1.468 billion in the 2021-22 year an increase of $94 million or 6.9 percent from the previous year's actual expense. The majority of funding within this vote is allocated to the multi-category appropriation Investing in Children and Young People".The progress towards transformation of care and protection under Oranga Tamariki has been often raised by the public. And accordingly we learnt that in 2021-2022 $23 million was allocated to improving the wellbeing of tamariki and whānau with the greatest need. The Minister told us this funding will enable the ministry to devolve power to Māori and to regions in New Zealand and that this funding will support the ministry's response to the report of the ministerial advisory board which will be discussed later.We discussed the devolution of power to iwi and Māori organisations in the context of the new Section 7AA in the Oranga Tamariki Act requiring improved outcomes for Māori. Budget 2021 provides $21 million for by Māori for Māori services. The Minister told us that bespoke solutions are required as the needs of communities differ. The Estimates hearing covered such topics as the significant organisational change with the resignation of the chief executive and the announcement of the ministerial advisory board. The board was due to report back to the Minister in August 2021 in regards to Oranga Tamariki.The committee also asked about the approach to addressing violence. We were advised that $8 million is allocated to the new policy initiative called "Preventing Family Violence and Sexual Violence: Working With Communities and Whānau to Support Parents and Reduce Risk". We also asked about the ministry's complaints process hearing the numbers sat at under 200 per year. We discussed the independent child's monitor. We learned that the monitor will become its own departmental agency.We heard about the changes to care and protection facilities and asked whether institutions are appropriate places for children who have experienced significant trauma. The Minister told us that the ministry is moving towards smaller more home-like facilities with $71 million over the next four years to see these built. Oranga Tamariki is partnering with iwi to build these.As the chair I sincerely thank the Minister officials and clerks and the select committee members for a thorough and robust set of hearings. Thank you."
van Velden Brooke; Woods MeganBROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'll make this quite quick because I just have one point to raise to the Minister. I think this is really important for all New Zealanders and I want to just ask the Minister for the record: did she just tell New Zealand that the Tenancy Tribunal should not enforce the law if landlords have not met the healthy homes standards due to COVID? Madam Chair?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Brooke van Velden.BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): Will the Minister just answer the question?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): No. That is not what I told the House.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Thank you. We will now move on to the next part of the Estimates debate.
Special Debate — Housing
Willis Nicola; Salesa JennyNICOLA WILLIS (National): Noting the significant allocations in this Budget with a purpose of provision of State housing I wonder whether the Minister thinks it's acceptable that on average people now wait 293 days to be housed in a State house having been judged as eligible for one and whether given in September 2017 that figure was 104 days—so around a third of the waiting time—the Minister would consider reinstituting a Public Service target to reduce public housing wait times as existed when that Minister came to office. Or does it remain the Minister's position that as long as she keeps allocating hundreds of millions if not billions to Kāinga Ora then one day someday things might get better—even though the evidence month after month year after year is that the waiting list keeps growing the waiting times keep growing and that every time they pile more costs on to rents more people turn up in need of a State house? I wonder if she'll answer that.I also return to the point that the Minister has refused to address while asked by me and other members tonight which is whether she will address the widespread view in the community that Kāinga Ora is routinely over-bidding for properties. Land prices are skyrocketing in New Zealand stifling housing supply and the Government's housing arm is out-competing private developers for land and that Minister in this debate has refused to address how that provides value for taxpayer money. CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): I call—Hon Dr Megan Woods: Madam Speaker do we still have any time?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Yes. I call on the Minister Hon. Dr Megan Woods.Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): Thank you. In the final seconds that we have remaining in this debate. I'd just like to say that we are a Government that do not believe that the market alone is going to fix the housing crisis. Over a series of decades it has served up a crisis and we on this side of the House do believe that you need an active Government that is involved and committed to solving it. I don't think it comes as any surprise that there will be other property developers who are competing for the same land that might sometimes write a letter to a Minister and a Prime Minister because they don't buy that piece of land. This is the price of having an active Government and one we do not resile from.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The ACT Party have a few more minutes for this part of the debate so I'll allow Brooke van Velden to ask the last question.
Woods MeganHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): Thank you Madam Chair. In response to the question around time frames and whether or not an extension will be granted as the member herself has identified it's the Associate Minister of Housing who's responsible for this piece of work. As she's also acknowledged that that Minister Minister Williams has acknowledged that there is an issue here and it is a continuing issue that she is looking at. But what I can reassure both that member and tenants is that there does need to be a degree of pragmatism around this in terms of how the tribunal would need to consider such matters what would be reasonable. Now there will be tenancies that swapped over before the deadline and before the country went into lockdown. I don't think the tribunal would be granting leniency there because there wouldn't be a reason that was associated with the lockdown that would've got in the way in terms of complying with that standard. But as in all things we will be pragmatic and continue to look at the issue and the tribunal will apply a degree of pragmatism and consideration and be reasonable there as well.In terms of the questions that came from another Opposition member around whether or not there had been a change that prevented Kāinga Ora from—well it wasn't so much a question; it was an allegation that there'd been a change that prevented Kāinga Ora from evicting tenants. That simply is not true. Kāinga Ora can evict tenants. In fact it has made three evictions since 2017. So to state that there has been a change that prevents it is simply misleading and untrue.But I think one of the approaches since we came into Government is that we know these are some of the most vulnerable and if these people cannot be housed here more work needs to be done to ensure that these people can be housed in a way that is suitable. I think one of the things that I have always failed to understand or even hear a solution from those that oppose that just advocate for evicting people evicting people evicting people is these people still exist and they live somewhere and they're going to be someone's neighbour. So how about we put in place the right supports in order to make sure these people actually can sustain a tenancy? Of course no one is excusing the kinds of behaviours we've heard about in the media but I think the member showed her true colours when she asked what budgets we had in the appropriations for security for coming down with a heavy hand.In fact what I would instead point the member to is the part of the appropriation that shows an increased budget in our new builds where we actually provide wraparound services for those living in transitional and public housing. I would point to the fact that now in many of our new Kāinga Ora developments we are building in space to have on-site community development to work with the tenants as well as provide the wraparound services. I think this is what will benefit New Zealand as a whole.
van Velden BrookeBROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. I hoped maybe I could just simplify one of the Kāinga Ora matters by asking a very simple question of the Minister: does Kāinga Ora ever bid against private developers and if so why? Now I'd like to go back to my second question of the night which I note the Minister once again didn't answer and that was a simple question about the healthy homes standards. I know it might be easy to answer the easier questions here but I can't help but be part of the ACT Party and ask the hard ones. But we do expect answers.Now this goes to the heart of the matter for landlords New Zealanders who are providing other New Zealanders homes. They had a deadline of 1 July to make sure that their homes for tenants comply with the healthy homes standards within 90 days of any new tenancy. Now some landlords have said that they will be unable to comply with that standard because of COVID restrictions and the delays that have been put in place because of those restrictions. They are asking for more certainty to know that they will not be unfairly penalised through no fault of their own because they couldn't meet those standards. So I'm asking: will the Government provide an extension for those landlords who'll be caught out through no fault of their own who may be outside—these are law-abiding people who want to do the right thing but they're unsure what the Government is expecting for them to do the right thing. Because when the ACT Party asked for advice on whether they would give these landlords an extension the Minister withheld the advice that she has received even though she admits that there could be a problem. So will the housing Minister commit to actually allowing these landlords some peace of mind and give them the advice that the Government has received and let them know whether this extension will be granted?
Willis NicolaNICOLA WILLIS (National): I want to note for the Hansard that I have given the Minister multiple opportunities to address what I think are substantive questions about how taxpayers can be assured that value for money will be achieved for the billions of dollars that this Government has allocated for the purchase of land by Kāinga Ora and that the Minister has not chosen to address those questions. I find that very concerning. I think this is a matter of public accountability and that it would be appropriate for the Minister to share with this committee the advice she has had on those matters. None the less given that she doesn't want to address how this $2 billion piggy bank will in fact face constraints I will ask her some other questions. I would like to know from the Minister whether she can confirm that she was provided advice that tax changes put forward by that Government to remove interest deductibility for housing and to increase the brightline test could have the effect of increasing churn in the rental market with the impact being felt mostly by those at the lower-income levels of the tenancy market with the likely outcome that it could lead to an increase in demand for social housing and an increase in demand for emergency housing.If she can confirm that she received that advice I wish to know what she makes of the fact that the State house waiting list has continued to increase at a rapid rate and that rental prices have continued to accelerate. And I wish the Minister to give this committee an assurance of by what date this Government will finally succeed in reducing the State house wait-list at the very minimum to the levels it was at when that Government took office.
Logie JanJAN LOGIE (Green): Thank you. Just a quick follow-up to that actually. The Greens are interested in the implementation of healthy homes standards because they make such a profound difference in terms of money in the family and the health of people being able to go to work and to school. So we were pleased to see the introduction of the new standards from July this year. We're just wondering what proportion of new tenancies entered into since that date are fully compliant with the healthy homes standards and what enforcement action if any has been undertaken against non-compliant landlords.
van Velden BrookeBROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. With the time I have left I'd like to talk to one other issue and this is in regards to the healthy home standards. I know that the associate housing Minister said that she was aware that some landlords won't be able to meet compliance deadlines because of COVID restrictions and she had received advice on that. However she was not willing to release that advice publicly to let landlords know whether the Government should believe that there should be an extension so landlords who might not be able to comply through no fault of their own would actually know what the rules are going forward. If the associate Minister is withholding that advice will she release it?
Logie JanJAN LOGIE (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. I'm interested in exploring a bit around rental costs which we know have increased by 10 percent in the year June 2020 to June 2021 according to TradeMe's property index. If I think about my neighbourhood in Cannons Creek a traditionally very low-income community where for rental houses now they're asking almost $600 for an ex-State house for low-income families it's completely out of reach for most people. I note that Te Puni Kōkiri advised the Government to implement a rent freeze during periods of alert level 4 but this was not implemented. So I'm interested in what projections the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development have regarding future rental increases for the coming year and is the ministry considering further measures to regulate rental increases?
Willis NicolaNICOLA WILLIS (National): I return to the line of questioning that I raised earlier because I think it's very important that the Minister provide assurances about the billions of dollars that have been allocated in this Budget for land acquisition. The concern I raised was a substantive one. It was: how can the Government be confident when it goes out to purchase large tracts of land for housing multimillion-dollar plots of land tens of millions of dollars being spent on land that when it does that it is adding net benefit for taxpayers? Because the alternative in most of these scenarios is that a private developer purchases that land then builds housing on it. The record that New Zealanders are very well aware of whether it's KiwiBuild or the failed State house bill targets whether it's the slow build at Unitec is that actually the Government isn't as good at building houses at scale and pace as the private sector is.So the question is: how can the Government be confident when it purchases large pieces of land that it is not simply pumping up the price of land by outbidding private developers robbing them of opportunities to build urgently needed housing and stopping houses being brought to market as quickly as they would otherwise? This is a critical question. I know these are questions that officials across Government have also been asking. I would like to understand how the Minister can give taxpayers confidence that these funds will be spent prudently and that these funds will create value for taxpayers.