edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Pugh Maureen: Evidence Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePugh Maureen: Evidence Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11880. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MAUREEN PUGH (National): It is my pleasure to stand and speak to the Evidence Amendment Bill in its second reading today. This bill is in the name of the Hon Amy Adams and as we have heard today the Hon Amy Adams is credited with doing great work in this space at this time. It is another example of legislation being tidied up and made relevant for the 21st century and this is absolutely necessary for the clear and appropriate application of the legal system that we have in this country today.The changes involve a number of minor and technical amendments—many of which have been debated in detail today. They are as a result of the Law Commission’s review of the Evidence Act 2006. That review took place as we have heard in 2013. Included in the amendments to this bill are those relating to the video record of evidence and how that evidence can be released and to whom. It puts victims at the heart of the justice system in these amendments and it does ensure that our more vulnerable and more sensitive cases are actually dealt with and considered in respect of their sensitivity and the impact on those witnesses and that of course helps to reduce their anxiety and stress in an otherwise stressful situation.Clause 32 of the bill which adds a replacement section 107 to the Act provides directions about the way child complainants are to give evidence. This is simply putting the victims at the heart of this justice system. It gives child witnesses the right to a support person when they are giving evidence and provides for alternate ways to provide evidence.Clause 33 of the bill which amends section 119 of the Act introduces three new offences for the improper handling of video records of evidence and is further expanded by inserting new sections 119A and 199B in clause 33A which deal with how parties may access video records of evidence outside those criminal or Family Court cases.This bill is another step in the Government’s commitment to updating the justice system making it more efficient and more focused on victims. I have great pleasure in commending this bill to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Evidence Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Evidence Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11879. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Clare Curran—5 minutes.
Bond Ria: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBond Ria: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11865. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.RIA BOND (NZ First) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement that “New Zealand is now one of the few countries in the OECD to have a target and a comprehensive plan to tackle childhood obesity” regarding the launch of the Childhood Obesity Plan?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Yes.Ria Bond: Can he confirm that New Zealand previously had a childhood obesity plan launched in 2004 named Healthy Eating - Healthy Action to improve nutrition improve physical activity levels and reduce obesity until his Government cut the funding in 2009 saying it was part of a nanny State agenda?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: It was not really a plan and it was outdated.Ria Bond: Given his answer does he stand by his statement that children in the most deprived areas are three times more likely to be obese; if so can he explain why Mangonui School a decile 3 school in Northland had its Health Promoting Schools funding cut in 2015?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Yes.Ria Bond: Would he agree that it would be a better use of taxpayers’ money to give funding directly to schools to undertake the Health Promoting Schools programme instead of sending a ministry-dictated facilitator to a region as neglected as Northland; if not why not?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I am not quite sure what she is talking about but what I can say is that in terms of Health Promoting Schools there has been a huge uplift in the numbers of decile 1 to 3 schools that are taking part in it. We aim to add another 150 schools to that. We have now added 96 and frankly we are making very good progress on that and it is a very important part of the overall plan.Clayton Mitchell: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If the Minister had difficulty understanding the question could we perhaps repeat the question so he could understand it?Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order. In fact it is timely for me to remind all members that members’ supplementary questions are meant to be short and concise. There have been a large number of occasions today when members have taken the opportunity to raise two questions within a supplementary question. I may start to be tougher on such things from next week onwards.
Ardern Jacinda: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeArdern Jacinda: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11863. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.JACINDA ARDERN (Labour) to the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage: What arts organisations will have their support cut or reduced by Creative New Zealand as a result of their funding forecast $11 million drop in funding from the Lottery Grants Board in the last two years?Hon NICKY WAGNER (Minister of Customs) on behalf of theMinister for Arts Culture and Heritage: The Minister is in Christchurch this afternoon attending an arts funding forum. For the past 10 yearsCreative New Zealand’s funding for the arts from both the Lottery Grants Board and the Government has averaged about $43 million a year and 2016-17 is predicted to be similar. The actual Lottery Grants Board figure for 2015-16 and the forecast for 2016-17 will not be finalised until the end of the financial year July 2016.Jacinda Ardern: Did she make a bid in this Budget to plug the anticipated substantial gap in Creative New Zealand’s funding; if not why not?Hon NICKY WAGNER: I am sorry I do not have information on that. However I do know that the Minister was enormously pleased with $11.6 million for the arts approved in Budget 2016.Jacinda Ardern: Why did she tell me at select committee in June last year when Creative New Zealand was facing a $3 million cut that she was working to address the issue when clearly she did nothing then and she has done nothing now?Hon NICKY WAGNER: The funding model has actually worked very well for over 3 decades. During that time lottery funding has fluctuated but in the last 10 years the arts have benefited from $280 million of lottery funding. Interestingly the Lotteries Commission is forecasting long-term growth.Jacinda Ardern: What does she have to say to Court Theatre chief executive Philip Aldridge when he stated that “cuts would have a huge impact on the Christchurch arts scene. Some of the smaller organisations will go to the wall. Everyone is surviving on a knife edge as it is.”?Hon NICKY WAGNER: The Minister is very aware of what is happening in the Christchurch arts scene. But Creative New Zealand makes decisions at arms’ length from the Government and she is advised by it that no decision has been made yet for its budget and funding allocations for 2016-17. Also the amount that is coming through from lotteries is increasing every month.Jacinda Ardern: Can she confirm that her recent advice to arts organisations and supporters over the decline in funding was to tell them to buy a Lotto ticket because “the balls might just roll our way” and is that not completely out of touch when arts organisations have been told to anticipate a 10 percent cut they are facing a loss of staff and a loss of resource and they will struggle to keep their doors open?Hon NICKY WAGNER: No the Minister cannot confirm that. But what she can confirm is that the Lotteries Commission is forecasting increased investment and long-term growth.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11863. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose.Is there any objection? There is objection.
Ardern Jacinda: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeArdern Jacinda: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11863. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACINDA ARDERN (Labour): I seek leave to hold over my questions until the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage is available to answer them.
Shaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11863. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): To what extent does New Zealand’s 19 percent increase in greenhouse gas emissions since his Government took office undermine “peace and erode trust” in the South Pacific region?
Carter David: Points of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email SystemText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email System[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11863. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: No. That is not a helpful point of order if indeed it is a point of order. [Interruption] Order! We are going to get back to question time. It is unfair on James Shaw and I am sorry to have had to interrupt his question time. Let us return.Question time resumed.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email SystemText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email System[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr Robertson! Does the member want to raise a point of order?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I do Mr Speaker. Now that members are clearly going to be without their GPS system will there be assistance provided to help them get back to their offices?
Carter David: Points of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email SystemText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email System[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member. I think the advice is to wait until question time is over and you return to your offices. We will bring you up to date as quickly as we can.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email SystemText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Points of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email System[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Further to your indication earlier I have been advised that the outage or the problem is wider than just with emails. It is the entire so-called Good system. Diaries and other opening—any of that could cause a problem.
Shaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): How does he explain the gulf between the US Department of Defense which declared that climate change is “an urgent and growing threat to our national security” and his own Government which is spending $20 billion on military equipment but virtually nothing on bringing down New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions?
Carter David: Speaker’s Statements — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email SystemText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Speaker’s Statements — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email System[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I do apologise for interrupting the line of questioning but I have just been asked to advise all members that there is a major problem with the Good email system and there is a risk that if you open your emails or attempt to before this is rectified you could lose all your information. So please take heed of that advice. Further updates will come via the normal system. [Interruption] Order! It is actually a rather—members may joke about it—serious matter. That is why I have warned you.Question time resumed.
Shaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11861. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government’s policies?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) on behalf of thePrime Minister: Yes.James Shaw: How is it that his Government has been able to put together a 15-year plan and find $20 billion for new defence spending but still after 8 years does not have an equivalent plan for the housing crisis or climate change?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: On behalf of the Prime Minister firstly may I thank you for the compliments paid to my defence Minister; and secondly may I also direct you to the plans that are clearly being put in place by the housing Minister. May I ask the question of why the Greens do not support any of them? We have 40 houses a day being built in Auckland. We have an increased workforce in Auckland in the construction industry of over 20000 people. We have 56000 sections for house sites produced under the special amenities area. None of those things of course wins the support of the Green Party which wants to stop immigration does not like urban development and of course generally likes to say anything it can to talk down the economy.Question time interrupted.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11858. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister of Transport: How is the Government supporting the increased uptake of public transport in Auckland?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): Last week alongside the Prime Minister and the Mayor of Auckland I had the pleasure of breaking the ground to mark the start of construction on the long-awaited City Rail Link. The project will be one of New Zealand’s largest-ever projects. This was made possible by the Government’s commitment made earlier this year with Auckland Council to bring forward a joint business plan for the City Rail Link and formalise our funding commitment from 2020. With Auckland’s population predicted to grow by more than 700000 over the next 30 years the City Rail Link will play an important part in getting people in and out of the city with ease and in boosting public transport use across the city.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: How will the City Rail Link project benefit Auckland?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: When completed the City Rail Link will double the capacity of Auckland’s rail network provide two new stations in the central city and benefit commuters whose travel times will be reduced significantly. For example Auckland Transport estimates that a commuter travelling between Henderson and the planned Aotea station will save on average 17 minutes per trip. The Government’s commitment to the project also provides certainty for large-scale projects like the $350 million NDG Auckland Centre and the $680 million Commercial Bay tower. Both of these projects will pump renewed investment into the central business district as well as create new jobs.
Mark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11853. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement on the defence budget made in the House on Thursday 2 June; if so how?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) on behalf of theMinister of Finance: Yes; by standing up and saying so.Ron Mark: When he said the Defence Force “gets roughly a $100 million increase in its baseline. Over 10 years … that roughly adds up a lot of money.” did he not realise that that is $10 billion short of what the Secretary of Defence needed in January 2016?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The member is confusing quite a large number of figures. Firstly the approximate $100 million operating figure is added to the defence baseline each year. Over that 10-year period it would equate to something in excess of $5 billion operating. The figure that the member is interested in is an $11 billion figure that was signalled by the Ministry of Defence on 27 January 2016 which is a capital spend expected over a 10-year period.Ron Mark: Where in this defence white paper is the budgetary funding model that tells our serving defence personnel when and how the newly pledged $20 billion worth of new kit will be delivered?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: That is a question that should be best addressed to the Minister of Defence.Ron Mark: Where is the funding in the Budget to increase serving personnel numbers to at least the numbers they were when National took office in 2008?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: That would be in the $300 million addition to baselines announced in the Budget.Ron Mark: If only 1 week after Budget 2016 the Government’s forecast surplus dropped by $1 billion and there is no budgetary funding model in the white paper—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I have the supplementary question please.Ron Mark: —what confidence can any soldier or sailor or aviator have that this Government can and will deliver the $20 billion promised?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The $20 billion is made up of both operating and capital. Quite clearly this is a very different approach to military procurement from that of the past. So what this white paper does is it gives an overarching intent that is agreed by the military and by the Government about the sort of capability we have and the capacity we need in order to deliver that. What it then sets out is over a 15-year period a capital spend that the Government is prepared to agree to. It allows the military to go out now and on a case-by-case basis as they wish to replace aircraft inside the stipulation of surveillance strategic and tactical airlift of the ice-strengthened ships and the rest of the procurement that we know has to be replaced in the next few years—they can confidently engage in those purchases.
Brownlee Gerry: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Business Statement[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11853. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 14 June the Government will look to progress the Contract and Commercial Law Bill the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2016-17 Closely Held Companies and Remedial Matters) Bill and a number of other first readings on the Order Paper.
Points of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email SystemText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email System[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Points of OrderParliamentary ICT System—Good Email SystemHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Further to your indication earlier I have been advised that the outage or the problem is wider than just with emails. It is the entire so-called Good system. Diaries and other opening—any of that could cause a problem.Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member. I think the advice is to wait until question time is over and you return to your offices. We will bring you up to date as quickly as we can.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr Robertson! Does the member want to raise a point of order?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I do Mr Speaker. Now that members are clearly going to be without their GPS system will there be assistance provided to help them get back to their offices?Mr SPEAKER: No. That is not a helpful point of order if indeed it is a point of order. [Interruption] Order! We are going to get back to question time. It is unfair on James Shaw and I am sorry to have had to interrupt his question time. Let us return.Question time resumed.
Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeOral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Questions to MinistersSpending—Defence Force Climate Change and HousingJAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): How does he explain the gulf between the US Department of Defense which declared that climate change is “an urgent and growing threat to our national security” and his own Government which is spending $20 billion on military equipment but virtually nothing on bringing down New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) on behalf of thePrime Minister:That is a very silly question. The first point would be that the New Zealand Government is spending a lot on climate change. We have got a target for climate change—to reduce our levels to 30 percent below 2005. Of course 80 percent of our electricity is produced from renewable sources already unlike many other countries. We also as recently as a couple of weeks ago got rid of the two-for-one price on carbon. In general we are making every effort we can to reduce greenhouse gases in this country. To conflate those efforts with military spending is I think quite ridiculous.Question time interrupted.
Speaker’s Statements — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email SystemText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSpeaker’s Statements — Parliamentary ICT System—Good Email System[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Speaker’s StatementsParliamentary ICT System—Good Email SystemMr SPEAKER: I do apologise for interrupting the line of questioning but I have just been asked to advise all members that there is a major problem with the Good email system and there is a risk that if you open your emails or attempt to before this is rectified you could lose all your information. So please take heed of that advice. Further updates will come via the normal system. [Interruption] Order! It is actually a rather—members may joke about it—serious matter. That is why I have warned you.Question time resumed.
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11853. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 9 June 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Business StatementHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 14 June the Government will look to progress the Contract and Commercial Law Bill the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2016-17 Closely Held Companies and Remedial Matters) Bill and a number of other first readings on the Order Paper.
Vote: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11852. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clauses 1 to 4 be agreed to.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment presently.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill without amendment and the Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill without amendment.Report adopted.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11842. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 3 be agreed to.Ayes 61New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1.Clause 3 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment presently.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11842. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 2 be agreed to.Ayes 61New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1.Clause 2 agreed to.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11842. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes 61New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1.Clause 1 agreed to.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11840. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat schedule 2 be agreed to.Ayes 61New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1.Schedule 2 agreed to.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11839. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat schedule 1 be agreed to.Ayes 61New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1.Schedule 1 agreed to.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11839. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That Part 2 be agreed to.Ayes 61New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1.Part 2 agreed to.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11824. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That Part 1 be agreed to.Ayes 61New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1.Part 1 agreed to.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11820. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 60New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Noes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11819. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 60New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Noes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11817. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 60New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Noes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11814. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
Borrows Chester: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11852. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
Faafoi Kris: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFaafoi Kris: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11852. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): Given the efficiency of the Committee of the whole House I seek leave for the House to adjourn.
Mallard Trevor: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11852. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I am not going to let the member carry on debating something that is out of scope. The question is that clauses 1 to 4 stand part. Those of that opinion will say Aye—oh sorry. I will make it clear as I have previously that I am not putting Mr Seymour’s Supplementary Order Paper because it is out of scope.
Mallard Trevor: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11848. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): David Seymour I think—after the debacle earlier.
Sage Eugenie: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSage Eugenie: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11848. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]EUGENIE SAGE (Green): It will be only a brief call Mr Seymour. We are very pleased to support this bill. Yes there certainly have been parliamentary under-secretaries before but I do not think they have been responsible for such ideological nonsense as we have had with this parliamentary under-secretary and his promotion—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I am now going to warn the member. She is even worse than some of the people being off the topic before. Clauses 1 to 4 only.EUGENIE SAGE: Thank you Mr Chair. So we are pleased that the Government is going to support the bill because it is a tiny sign that it does recognise the value of the Official Information Act.However the Law Commission did a very comprehensive review of the Official Information Act putting out an issues paper in 2010 and then quite a comprehensive report in 2012 The Public’s Right to Know which recommended a much more extensive review of the legislation. It is really disappointing that the Government has not proceeded with that. So we would like to see the recommendations from the Law Commission’s report which are along the lines of some of the changes in Mr Seymour’s Supplementary Order Paper 181—which is out of scope and we are pleased it is out of scope because it is very poorly drafted—including that the Officers of Parliament with certain exclusions be included in the Official Information Act. We would like to see the Act completely rewritten so that it is very clear because as the Law Commission pointed out deciding or determining whether an agency is actually subject to the Act is quite complex.But I can see Mr Chair is a bit concerned about the scope of my speech so I will simply say that we support the bill.I congratulate the member in the chair Adrian Rurawhe and look forward to a much more comprehensive review of the legislation.
Mallard Trevor: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11848. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): OK the member will resume his seat. David Seymour—sorry Eugenie Sage.David Seymour: Mr Chair you can’t take the call away.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): It was an absolute mistake. I call Eugenie Sage.
Mitchell Mark: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11847. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): I just wanted to open my speech tonight by going back to the chair of the Government Administration Committee—the very good chair of our committee the Hon Ruth Dyson—and some comments that she made and directed towards Mr Seymour in his role as a parliamentary under-secretary. She challenged him in terms of when he had actually begun releasing documents under the Official Information Act (OIA). He came back and he was very clear about the fact that he had signed an agreement with the Minister of Education Minister Parata in December 2014 and that is when the process had begun. Just looking at the documentation that I have I can confirm that this bill was introduced into the House on 23 July 2015 and it was referred to the committee on 14 October.Hon Ruth Dyson: When was it lodged? You don’t know the answer to that question do you?MARK MITCHELL: Well that might be a very good question. If the chair takes a call that might actually be a very good question for the chair to answer.Hon Ruth Dyson: The Chair’s there.MARK MITCHELL: The chair of the select committee—the chair of the select committee. I have been waiting all night for the chair to take a call. I was assured that she will so we will wait and see. I think that this just supports and highlights the comments that were made by David Seymour—that actually he had already initiated this process under the OIA before the bill was even introduced into the House. So I just wanted to support him on that.I would be the first to admit that I was a bit cynical when this bill was introduced to the House.Hon Ruth Dyson: Surely not!MARK MITCHELL: No that was at the start of the process and I will explain why I was cynical because under a Labour Government—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): No the member is not going to explain why he was cynical. What he is going to do now is go back to debating clauses 1 to 4 which we are currently considering—remember? We had a first reading and a second reading. We have agreed to the principles of the bill. All we are doing now is debating whether these clauses do the job or not.MARK MITCHELL: I think the clauses will do the job Mr Chair. I do not think there is any concern or worry about that at all. But I am just very interested that our Parliament has actually had parliamentary under-secretaries before under both National and Labour Governments and the legislation that existed then seemed to work very well. I think we had the Hon Dover Samuels who was a parliamentary under-secretary. He seemed to operate very well under that legislation and so I could not see initially what the immediate issue was under the existing legislation. Parliamentary under-secretaries have obviously served very well and very transparently under previous Governments so—
Hudson Brett: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11846. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRETT HUDSON (National): I just note thanks to the Committee for agreeing to treat this all as one question. So let us move on.
Foster-Bell Paul: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11843. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): E Te Kaiwhakahaere I apologise for my tardy erection in the House. [Interruption] In speaking on this first clause of the—[Interruption] I am sorry. I apologise if I have embarrassed the member Mrs Martin but—[Interruption] Yes. In speaking on this first clause of the member—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! [Interruption] Order! I think if members could get a grip we will just—[Interruption] Just get on with it.PAUL FOSTER-BELL: In speaking to this first clause of the Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill in the name of the honourable member Adrian Rurawhe during this Committee of the whole House debate I first want to say—Richard Prosser: The upstanding member.PAUL FOSTER-BELL: Yes a very upstanding member—thank you Mr Prosser. The bill has a number of concerns for people on this side of the House but from the outset I want to indicate that the Government will be supporting it. That is because this is a Government that is concerned with transparency. We are believers in open government. We think it is good that the public of New Zealand can have scrutiny over what the Government does with its money and how it uses the resources granted to the executive by Parliamentand for those reasons in particular this part of the bill does meet with favour from this side of the House. So I want to congratulate the member Mr Rurawhe on actually convincing Government members with the power of his debate particularly in the select committee stage—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! The Committee was invited and declined the opportunity to have a broad-ranging debate across the clauses. I now ask the member to address clause 1.Kris Faafoi: I seek leave for all clauses to be taken as one debate again.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I am just going to get a little bit of advice because my understanding is that you cannot seek leave for the same thing twice. I am advised—which is slightly different from the way that Sir Gerry Wall used to rule well back—that the House is its own master and I will put the question. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. The member gets to start again.
Faafoi Kris: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFaafoi Kris: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11842. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): I seek leave for all clauses to be debated as one.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): So you want clauses 1 to 4 and Mr Seymour’s amendments—soon to be ruled out of order—to be debated as one question. Is there any objection to that? There is objection.
Mallard Trevor: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): No he did not. Right.
Mallard Trevor: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11839. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I apologise. I have fouled this up by giving the member a call and a bit of extra time. We will go straight to the question. We have of course debated schedules 1 and 2 as part of the earlier debate.
Foster-Bell Paul: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11839. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): I want to reiterate some of the arguments that have been made earlier in so far as they apply to the schedule of this bill. We on the Government side do not have—
Borrows Chester: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11824. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): No I pushed the button all by myself.
Dyson Ruth: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDyson Ruth: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11820. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills): I move That the question be now put.
Sepuloni Carmel: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSepuloni Carmel: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11818. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CARMEL SEPULONI (Junior Whip—Labour): I move That the question be now put.
Tisch Lindsay: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11817. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): We will have silence when votes are taken thank you.
Henare Peeni: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHenare Peeni: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11817. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PEENI HENARE (Labour—Tāmaki Makaurau): I move That the question be now put.A party vote was called for on the question that the question be now put.
Mitchell Clayton: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Clayton: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11814. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First): I move That the question be now put.
Logie Jan: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLogie Jan: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11811. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAN LOGIE (Green): I will keep this short and sweet because we have traversed the content and the detail of this bill significantly already in numerous debates. I would just like to speak to Part 1 and put on record the Green Party’s support for this bill but also acknowledge that the 22 weeks of paid leave that is in Part 1 is an accommodation that has been made by this member. I doubt that anyone on this side of the House would think it is ideal. With the amount of time that this House has been discussing the need for 26 weeks I think that actually everyone on this side of the House is probably ready to go straight to 26 weeks to give the country what it has asked so clearly for.However the fact that we have 22 weeks’ paid leave in Part 1 of this bill is another demonstration of the absolute willingness of the sponsor of this bill Sue Moroney to bend backwards to do everything in her power to try to persuade this Government to give the country what it wants. In the last iteration of this bill she confined it down to significantly premature babies and children with very significant disabilities—down to very significant measures. She brought it right down to try to get it over the line for even one group of people and still this Government just pushed and pushed and was so mean that it could not deliver it.The truth is Part 1 of this bill is another reflection of this Government’s meanness and how far this member has had to go to try to get it over the line. It is a real shame because actually all the evidence supports 26 weeks and we will speak more to that on Part 2 of the bill.