edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Mallard TrevorPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: No bills have been introduced. A petition has been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.CLERK: Petition of David Famularo requesting that the House put the Longfin Eel on the Wildlife Act 1953 as an absolutely protected species.SPEAKER: That petition stands referred to the Petitions Committee. Ministers have delivered papers.CLERK: Government Response to the Report of the Education and Workforce Committee on Pay TransparencyStatement of Performance Expectations 2022/23 of the Commerce Commission and the Climate Change Commission.SPEAKER: I present the Report of the Controller and Auditor-General entitled Governance of the City Rail Link Project. Those papers are published under the authority of the House. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK:Report of the Education and Workforce Committee on the Accident Compensation (Maternal Birth Injury and Other Matters) Amendment Billreport of the Governance and Administration Committee on the report of the Controller and Auditor-General Strategic suppliers: Understanding and managing the risks of service disruptionreports of the Petitions Committee on thepetition of Eliana Darrochpetition of Qiao Liureport of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee on the petition of David Aitken.SPEAKER: The bill is set down for second reading. The report of the Controller and Auditor-General is set down for consideration.
Mallard TrevorOBITUARIESWilliam Rex Austin MBESPEAKER: Members I regret to inform the House of the death on 23 June 2022 of William Rex Austin MBE of Ngāi Tahu Waitaha and Kāti Māmoe who was a National Party member representing the Awarua electorate from 1975 to 1987. During his membership of this House he served as Parliamentary Under-Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Fisheries and he chaired the Māori Affairs Committee. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and the sympathy with the relatives of the late former member. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect to his memory.Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
McKelvie IanTUESDAY 28 JUNE 2022The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSIAN McKELVIE (Assistant Speaker): 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 justice mercy and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Wednesday 22 June 2022 - Volume 760
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlements Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 109New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Maori 2.Noes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
VoteThe question is that Jan Logie's tabled amendment replacing clause 8 be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to. Ayes 12Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2Noes 107New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That clauses 1 to 8 be agreed to. Ayes 109New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Clauses 1 to 8 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment.House resumed.
Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlements Amendment Bill — In Committee—Clauses 1 to 8
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the report be adopted. Ayes 109New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.
VoteWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Junior Whip—Labour): I move That the question be now put.A party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlements Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 109New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): This bill is set down for committee stage forthwith.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlements Amendment Bill be now read a first time. Ayes 109New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That urgency be accorded.Ayes 65New Zealand Labour 65.Noes 54New Zealand National 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Motion agreed to.
12. Question No. 12—Workplace Relations and SafetyCAMILLA BELICH (Labour) to the Associate Minister for Workplace Relations and SafetyQuestion No. 12—Workplace Relations and Safety12. CAMILLA BELICH (Labour) to the Associate Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What announcement has the Government made about supporting new parents?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Associate Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): Last week the Government announced that paid parental leave entitlements will increase on 1 July this year from $621 to $661 per week a 6.3 percent increase before tax. This additional $40 a week will support approximately 20000 Kiwi families and will see those parents taking the full 26 weeks of parental leave receive up to an additional $1040 of support over that period. The Government's committed to continuing to support new parents during the crucial early months of their babies' lives.Camilla Belich: How does the increase to paid parental leave entitlements build on the Government's previous efforts to help new parents?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: We know that having a parent at home as long as possible to care for a child provides a huge benefit for that child's development and that's why we previously extended the duration of parental leave entitlements to 26 weeks. The Government is committed to making sure that families and parents receive the support they need to give their new child the best start to life and paid parental leave is one way to ensure this happens. Camilla Belich: What other work is the Government doing to support new parents?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Since we came in to office we've delivered a range of policies and support for new parents. We've boosted the Working for Families payments and the Best Start payments that provide financial support to all families with a newborn baby and made successive increases to the minimum wage. We've delivered a cost of living package more recently including a short-term payment for the 2.1 million people including new and expecting parents earning up to $70000. Overall we've introduced measures that have increased families' incomes lifted 66500 children out of poverty and seen a reduction in child poverty across all nine measures used.
9. Question No 9—Digital Economy and CommunicationsJAMIE STRANGE (Labour—Hamilton East) to the Minister for the Digital Economy and CommunicationsQuestion No 9—Digital Economy and Communications9. JAMIE STRANGE (Labour—Hamilton East) to the Minister for the Digital Economy and Communications: What recent announcements has he made about improving connectivity in rural New Zealand?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister for the Digital Economy and Communications): More good news. Last week I was delighted to announce how $60 million allocated through Budget 2022 will be used to further improve rural connectivity over the next few years. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown us time and again how critical a reliable connection is important to learning to working and to socialising at home. For rural businesses a reliable connection affords them opportunity to be more innovative and more productive and that's exactly what we need as we go about securing an economic recovery for the country. This fund was a 2020 election promise and we have delivered on that promise.Jamie Strange: How will the funding be allocated?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The sum of $43 million will be used to improve network capacity and speeds where rural users have been experiencing slow broadband. This includes but is not limited to settlements in the Far North Gisborne the Manawatū and Whanganui region Taranaki Southland and—the member will be pleased—the mighty Waikato. In addition $15 million will go towards a new initiative called the Remote Users Scheme. This scheme will aim to provide broadband services to New Zealanders in some of the country's most remote locations—those who right now have no coverage or only have voice calling and text message services—plus there's a provision for an additional $2 million to be spent on extending the successful Marae Digital Connectivity initiative for up to two years.Jamie Strange: How many people stand to benefit from this funding?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Taken together with the rural capacity upgrades I announced in February the Government has now allocated over $90 million towards upgrading the capacity of rural networks to be rolled out over the next three years. Tens of thousands of rural residents stand to benefit from this combined investment. This is over and above those already receiving improved broadband through the existing RBI 2—or Rural Broadband Initiative phase two—which has another year yet to run. By the end of next year we're on track to see 99.8 percent of the population with access to new or improved broadband connections.
5. Question No. 5—TourismDr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour—Banks Peninsula) to the Minister of TourismQuestion No. 5—Tourism5. Dr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour—Banks Peninsula) to the Minister of Tourism: What response has he seen from the tourism industry following the announcement to remove pre-departure testing?Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Tourism): The tourism industry has been delighted with the Government's decision as announced by Minister Verrall to remove pre-departure testing from 20 June. Rebecca Ingram the chief executive of Tourism Industry Aotearoa the peak body for tourism summed it up when she said and I quote The earlier date will be a boost for the ski industry with the news following Queenstown's biggest snowfall in years … We're excited that we can now move into the next phase of recovery and confidently welcome more international … (visitors) to our shores."Dr Tracey McLellan: What if anything has the Government done to help the ski industry recover?Hon STUART NASH: In April Cabinet approved a border exemption for 275 skilled ski workers to enter New Zealand. This has since been increased to 335 places due to the demand. NZSki chief executive Paul Anderson has noted that the outlook for the season is extremely positive and they had filled all the roles and were ready for the season. This past Saturday I had great pleasure to accompany the Prime Minister to the Remarkables where we officially opened the 2022 ski season. I can categorically say to international visitors that the snow is here the requirement for pre-departure testing is gone and we are ready to welcome you.Dr Tracey McLellan: What is the Government doing to help the tourism industry move into the next stage of recovery?Hon STUART NASH: The $54.2 million innovation programme for tourism recovery that I announced on Budget day will see the Government working alongside tourism businesses and key stakeholders to develop new innovative ideas that will improve the sustainability and productivity of eligible businesses. The industry transformation plan for tourism a partnership between workers business Māori and the Government has an objective of establishing a regenerative model for tourism. Its initial focus is on better work which is a key issue for the tourism workforce. I will have more to say on this later in the year but in the meantime I can say again to international tourists the snow is fantastic the borders are open and New Zealanders are here to welcome you."
2. Question No. 2—FinanceHELEN WHITE (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 2—Finance2. HELEN WHITE (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The manufacturing sector has remained robust in a challenging environment. The seasonally adjusted BNZ - Business New Zealand Performance and Manufacturing Index for May rose 1.7 points to 52.9 just below its long-term average. Production new orders employment and delivery of raw materials all expanded and BNZ's economists said that manufacturing output in the first three months of the 2022 year had been affected by Omicron-induced delays and the improvement in production signalled a decent rebound in manufacturing in the June quarter. The volatile global environment means 2022 is continuing to be challenging for businesses and households but New Zealand's strong response to the pandemic has put us in a position where we can come through better than most other countries and are well positioned to deal with the challenges ahead of us.Helen White: What other reports has he seen on the economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Retail card spending has also remained resilient. Statistics New Zealand reported earlier this month that seasonally adjusted retail card spending rose 1.9 percent in May compared with the previous month led by fuel and clothing sales. Stripping out fuel core spending rose by 0.9 percent. The figures indicate that spending patterns are returning to a normal pattern following the end of COVID restrictions and the opening up to the rest of the world. Helen White: What support has been available for businesses as the economy deals with the challenges of Omicron?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The targeted COVID support payment has helped keep viable the vulnerable businesses through the peak of Omicron. As of June this payment had paid out $1.3 billion to 112877 applicants. On a regional basis Auckland has received 50.5 percent of the payments followed by Christchurch on 9.6 percent and Wellington on 8 percent. By industry construction made up 15.2 percent of all payments followed by accommodation on 14.8 percent other services on 9.3 percent and retail trade on 8 percent. This payment has provided cash flow and confidence to help protect jobs and support New Zealand businesses through a very difficult time. We stand by the decisions that the Government has made to support businesses and households to get through Omicron and give us the strong basis to move forward from now.
Tuesday 21 June 2022 - Volume 760
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Companies (Levies) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 87New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 32New Zealand National 32.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time. Bill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee.
Companies (Levies) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Financial Markets (Conduct of Institutions) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Clauses 1 and 2
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Clause 1 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): The question is that the Minister's amendments to clause 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 173 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That clause 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Clause 2 as amended agreed to.Bill to be reported with amendment.House resumed.CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Madam Speaker the committee has considered the Financial Markets (Conduct of Institutions) Amendment Bill and reports it with amendment. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): No; the Minister is correct on this occasion. The question is that the Minister's amendments to Part 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 173 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Part 2 as amended agreed to.Schedule 1CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): The question is that the Minister's amendments to Schedule 1 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 173 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Schedule 1 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.Schedule 2CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): The question is that the Minister's amendments to Schedule 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 173 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Schedule 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Schedule 2 as amended agreed to.
Financial Markets (Conduct of Institutions) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Part 2
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): The question is that the Hon David Clark's amendments to Part 1—Andrew Bayly: Oh sorry Mr Chair—we're not going to get a speech?CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): You're too late.The question is that the Minister's amendments to Part 1 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 173 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 42New Zealand National 32; ACT New Zealand 10.Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Financial Markets (Conduct of Institutions) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Part 1
12. Question No. 12—COVID-19 ResponseSHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote) to the Minister for COVID-19 ResponseQuestion No. 12—COVID-19 Response12. SHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote) to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: Mānawatia a Matariki Mr Speaker. What recent announcements has she made about reconnecting New Zealanders to the world?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister for COVID-19 Response): From midnight last night travellers to New Zealand are no longer required to take a COVID-19 pre-departure test when entering the country. The Government was clear: we intended to remove this requirement for travellers by 31 July. I'm happy to say we have been able to bring the time line forward as COVID-19 cases have continued to decrease despite nearly 400000 arrivals since the border reopened. Of those arrivals 90 percent are undertaking their required testing once they're in the country and only a fraction of those are returning positive results. Removing pre-departure testing is just one more step the Government is taking to safely reconnect New Zealanders to the world.Shanan Halbert: Why has the Government removed pre-departure tests?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: The Government has been aware of the challenges that pre-departure testing is posing to those wishing to travel to New Zealand. This includes the availability and cost of getting a test in other countries and the context of others winding back testing availability or requirements themselves. In addition the level of compliance for international arrivals undertaking their post-arrival testing in New Zealand is very high while the positivity rate is very low at around 2 percent of tested arrivals. This provides us assurance there's a very small number of cases entering New Zealand and that we have the tools in place to detect if a change occurs.Shanan Halbert: What other protections remain at the border?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: While we are removing the need for a pre-departure test we are keeping in place a robust set of surveillance measures to detect any possible new variants of COVID-19. This includes retaining the requirement for self-tests on day 0/1 and day 5/6 and a follow up PCR test if either of the rapid antigen tests turn up positive. These PCR samples will continue to be sequenced which gives the Government the best possible indication of variants arriving in New Zealand.
10. Question No.10—EducationMARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Associate Minister of Education (School Operations):Question No.10—Education10. MARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Associate Minister of Education (School Operations): What recent announcements has the Government made about supporting attendance and engagement at school?Hon JAN TINETTI (Associate Minister of Education (School Operations)): Earlier this month the Government launched our comprehensive Attendance and Engagement Strategy that sets expectations and targets to turn around years of declining attendance rates. School attendance has been declining since 2015 and COVID-19 has made it worse. Throughout the pandemic the Government has provided targeted resources and support for schools to respond to any disengagement by students through the Urgent Response Fund (URF). The URF model was distributed during a crisis response; it was during a global pandemic and one of the most challenging times in our recent history. Distributing this funding during this time was never going to lift overall attendance rates higher as we fought COVID-19. It was designed to be responsive to the situation. The strategy we have just launched takes the next steps. It will help us address longstanding issues around attendance and engagement through working closer with communities and addressing the causes.Marja Lubeck: What targets and expectations have been set by the Government to lift attendance?Hon JAN TINETTI: In consultation with schools and communities we have set ambitious targets for students who fall within the chronic moderate and irregular attendance categories. Our headline target is that at least 70 percent of students will be attending class regularly by 2024 and 75 percent by 2026. This takes us back to an even higher rate of attendance than 2015 when the decline started to occur. To put this into context regular attendance is attending school 90 percent of the time or nine out of 10 days. Currently only about 60 percent of students are attending at this level. We will achieve this by prevention—identifying early trends of irregular attendance. This is why we have set a new target for schools to notify parents and caregivers on the day of absence and to establish dedicated action plans to prevent further absences.Marja Lubeck: What supports are being provided to schools to implement these targets?Hon JAN TINETTI: Schools parents and wider communities will be well supported with targeted and evidence-based resources. For example Budget 2022 delivered an $88 million package of proven initiatives such as $15.5 million for a scale-up of Te Aho o Te Kura Pounamu support for at-risk ākonga to re-engage in school in line with its proven big-picture approach—supporting around 3500 at-risk students annually. I know that these targets will be challenging to meet but it's vital New Zealand children and young people attend school and get the education they need to set themselves up for life.
Commerce (Grocery Sector Covenants) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Part 1
Dean Jacqui; McKelvie IanCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members the time has come for me to report progress.Progress to be reported.House resumed.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Mr Speaker the committee has considered the Commerce (Grocery Sector Covenants) Amendment Bill and reports progress. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): This bill is set down for further consideration in committee next sitting day. Members the House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow.The House adjourned at 9.57 p.m.
Dean Jacqui; McKelvie IanASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Commerce (Grocery Sector Covenants) Amendment Bill.COMMERCE (GROCERY SECTOR COVENANTS) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteePart 1 Amendment to Part 2 of Act (which relates to restrictive trade practices)CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Members the House is in committee on the Commerce (Grocery Sector Covenants) Amendment Bill. Members we now come to Part 1. This is the debate on clause 4—Amendment to Part 2 of the Act (which relates to restrictive trade practices)". The question is that Part 1 stand part."
Williams ArenaARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe Madam Speaker. Ngā mihi o te tau hou Māori. Haere mai nei ki tēnei Whare. A short call from me. This bill is a simple straightforward one that ensures that while the enduring solution that we need is progressed our support workers don't move backward. And it's been a pleasure to hear the contributions of the members around the House tonight engaging with the technical detail of this bill. It's been a pleasure listening to a Minister who is engaged with that detail has answered the questions and has thoroughly engaged with this House's processes and I commend this bill to the House.
Prime Willow-JeanWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland): I commend this bill to the House.
Bennett GlenGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth): I'm grateful to be part of the Labour Party which is the party of the working people; I'm grateful to have a Minister of Health who is exceptional; and I'm grateful for the Minister of Health Andrew Little for bringing this piece of legislation to this House. On behalf the working people I commend this bill to the House.
Sharma GauravDr GAURAV SHARMA (Labour—Hamilton West): It is a pleasure to take a call for the third time on the Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlements Amendment Bill for the third reading. I just want to say it's been interesting hearing all sides of the conversation. I think it is an important bill that helps plug some of the gaps that are remaining from the original issue and I would like commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Pallett Sarah; Dean JacquiSARAH PALLETT (Labour—Ilam): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'll tell you what I think is disrespectful: dragging Kristine Bartlett to the Supreme Court to actually put a clause into a bill in 2017 that prevented workers for five long years from bringing genuine pay equity claims which fortunately expires on 30 June. I commend this bill to the House.Hon Member: Is that it?ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order!
Leavasa Dr Anae NeruDr ANAE NERU LEAVASA (Labour—Takanini): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise to support this bill the Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlements Amendment Bill. I thank the Minister Andrew Little for his responses during the committee stage. I also want to confirm there is a ministerial group that oversees employment relations—that is the Ministerial Group on State Sector Relations (MOGSSR). So I am happy with everything. I commend this bill to the House.
Little AndrewThird ReadingHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Health): I move That the Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlements Amendment Bill be now read a third time.I won't speak for too long not only because I won't be able to speak for too long but I'm thankful for members of the House for the very great scrutiny that they have given in traversing all manner of policy issues that sit behind the bill and the funding of it as well. The members have quite correctly pointed out that that is what would be ordinarily discussed in the select committee proceeding. That is not what has happened this evening. It is important to get this legislation through and I do reiterate the motivating factors behind it. This is a group of low-paid workers. The previous Government legislated a set of pay rates that were protected and applied to all of the workforce. I know we've had a bit of banter across the House this evening and the National Party has proven really what heroes of the working class they actually are—on their off night. It was the right thing to do and it was a progressive thing to do but it did leave in abeyance the pay equity ambition that this group of workers had and to the extent that that was done in order to get changes to the Equal Pay Act so that there might be a better process for that to happen that was certainly understandable. In any event five years has moved on and it has not been possible to progress anything further at least towards this group of workers' ambitions for pay equity.What we are doing tonight is an interim and somewhat pragmatic step that gives a pay adjustment. It is not what the workers themselves would have wanted it is not what the employers themselves are saying they would like to have provided—funded by the Government—but it is I think in the circumstances not out of order in terms of what's happening elsewhere in the labour market. But what's most important is that we now get on. This Government backs these workers and their employers to get on and get a pay equity settlement done under the Equal Pay Act. We will do that. We've made some arrangements and made some commitments in order to do that and we will do that. In a matter of hopefully not too long a period of time we'll significantly lift the incomes for these workers and make it a more attractive proposition for those who would want to go into this sort of work and this is on the back of a general movement that this Government is making to lift remuneration in the health sector.This is a very important workforce as we have seen. They've made an enormous contribution throughout COVID but actually they do every other day as well. We need to do everything we can to show how much we value the health workforce and support them to lift their pay. So that's what this does. As I say I'm very thankful to members for their attention to this in this urgent setting and I look forward to their continued support. On that basis I commend the bill to the House.
McKelvie IanCHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): This time! The committee has considered the Support Workers (Pay Equity Settlements) Amendment Bill and reports it without amendment. I remove—I don't remove; I've done that twice already. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
Dean Jacqui; McKelvie IanASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): I am seeking leave on behalf of the House to recast the vote. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Members I think we are there.
Dean Jacqui; Kerekere Elizabeth; McKelvie IanASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): This bill is set down for third reading forthwith but before I take the Minister's call I understand that a member may wish to raise a point of order. Dr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Deputy Musterer—Green) (remote): Thank you. Point of order Madam Speaker. Kia ora. We would like to seek leave to do a vote again on Jan Logie's tabled amendment. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Oh hang on—no.Dr ELIZABETH KEREKERE: Oh I've done it wrong. Aroha mai. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Right. Order! You're going to love this—you've got to love this. It'll be infamous. So members I would invite some kind member to seek leave to go back into committee—Hon Michael Woodhouse: Ah! ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): —I know—for the purpose of casting party votes on two questions. Dr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Deputy Musterer—Green) (remote): Oh I'm not sure of the exact right words—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Not yet—take a point of order.Dr ELIZABETH KEREKERE: Point of order Madam Speaker.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Seek leave to go back into committee.Dr ELIZABETH KEREKERE: I seek leave of the House to go back into committee to recast the two votes.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Is there any objection? There appears to be none. House in committee. CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Madam Speaker the committee has considered the Support Workers (Pay Equity Settlements) Amendment Bill and reports it without amendment. I move that the report be adopted. Willow-Jean Prime: No we go back. CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie: Oh we've got to go back further than that.
Kerekere Elizabeth; Dean Jacqui; McKelvie IanDr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Deputy Musterer—Green) (remote): Point of order Madam Speaker. Kia ora. Because we were online and not able to unmute ourselves we were not able to vote yes for Jan Logie's amendment or to vote no for the passing.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you. Does the member wish to seek to have the vote corrected?Dr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Deputy Musterer—Green): Yes please.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order Madam Speaker. Without wanting—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Before I take the member's point of order I will just take some advice.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Oh that will be the same advice. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): I'm sure you're going to give me something—I'm quite convinced you are. Where would we be without you?Thank you for that members. As the vote passed on the voices there is no need to recast the vote. Was that consistent—oh point of order.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Point of order Madam Speaker. That is absolutely correct and 50 percent in respect of the point I was going to make. What I was going to suggest to the House is that this is a technical issue that is a consequence of the virtual Parliament. If leave was sought for a vote to be had on those two questions certainly the National Party would not oppose it. The difficulty the Green Party has now is that their opposition can't be recorded except in Hansard by this dialogue. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Let me just think about that. Thank you for your indulgence everyone. We're going to complete the committee stage and before I take the first call on the third reading I will again invite any party—Dr Elizabeth Kerekere—to seek the vote being recast.CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Madam Speaker the committee has considered the Support Workers (Pay Equity Settlements) Amendment Bill and reports it without amendment. I move That the report be adopted.
McKelvie IanCHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): The question is that Jan Logie's tabled amendment replacing clause 8 be agreed to.Amendment not agreed to.Clauses 1 to 8 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment.House resumed.
Little AndrewHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Health): Thank you Mr Chairman. Look with all due respect members are repeating themselves and I'm happy to repeat the answers but—Hon Michael Woodhouse: That's because we're not getting any answers.Hon ANDREW LITTLE: And the members have got the answers though sometimes you do get to choose whether you hear or not and they've clearly made a choice. I once again reiterate that the funding envelope that is provided for to meet the cost of this increase covers all costs including the on-costs. Also to the member's second point it's not for me to explain why others don't reach agreement but agreement wasn't reached and so we are proceeding accordingly in order to provide an increase and to provide protection. Everybody is however agreed the most important thing is to get on and get pay equity done which is why most of my discussions in the last few weeks have centred on how do we support the pay equity discussion process because that's what these workers most want and have been waiting the longest for.
Watts Simon; Little AndrewSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Thank you Mr Chair. I rise because maybe I didn't make it clear enough when I stood up last time around that very simple question. I'll say it again because I think this is the seventh time that we're asking it and it's simple: have we got assurance back from the sector that the offer in terms of the increase on the table is within the funding envelope that has been provided by Government in order to make that happen? I'll just buy a little bit more time just to let the officials provide that because I think that's important and then we can crack on. But while we're doing that let's move on to that other clause—again related—in regards to clause 8 of the legislation as well. So what I'm interested in particularly is that the Minister has just articulated in regards to the conversations that were actually occurring I think you mentioned last year—which obviously indicates that there was some level of dialogue that was initiated with the unions in regards to this earlier which is obviously reassuring to hear that that hasn't just been kicked off recently. But in regards to that dialogue I guess the challenge is what were some of the key factors—again related to clause 8 of the legislation: what were some of the key factors around why that agreement couldn't be reached with these parties taking into account that we've had five years to try to resolve this?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Health): Sorry I just wonder whether the member might repeat the last part of his question because he faded off. I'm the one losing my voice but I couldn't hear him.SIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): I'm not sure who faded off then but I'll take it that it was a bit of both of us maybe. So my question was: what were some of the key reasons why the parties couldn't reach agreement in regards to the dialogue that was had around trying to find a resolution to this matter? It notes obviously in the departmental disclosure that one of the factors was around the size of the increase but were there any other factors that were at play and what steps were taken in order to mitigate that so that we could have avoided where we are tonight?
Little AndrewHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Health): The member asked why it took so long to initiate discussions. I've been engaging with the unions on this issue since last year so it's a variety of discussions. Most of the discussions last year centred on a whole range of workplace issues and it's fair to say that there's a range of issues with this workforce where improvement is called for in terms of the structure of work work hours the in-between travel issues and what have you. So a range of issues have been under discussion during all that time and in that time the issues about this legislation of continuing protection but—most importantly—seeking pay equity have been very much at the forefront of that discussion.In terms of when we can expect things to happen as I've said my engagements more recently with both unions and the employer representatives have been about making sure that all parties are supported but particularly in relation to the technical work that goes with pay equity—because it is pretty full on—is there. So that support is there. We will support both sides not just from the Ministry of Health but from the Public Service Commission. We'll have technical experts available and we will provide funding for both sides so that they can progress their claims. The bill sets a self-repeal date of the new rates of 18 months. It's my expectation that we would conclude pay equity discussions before then and of course there's nothing that prevents—following discussion—the Government with the parties from increasing these pay rates on a subsequent occasion within the 18 months that is provided for in these terms.I come from a union background. I come from a negotiation background and I operate on the principle that nothing is beyond negotiation and I'm sure that will be the case with this group of workers.
Watts SimonSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I acknowledge the Minister's comments before that we seem to be caught up on the numbers but I feel like we're caught up in a game of dodgeball here.Nicola Grigg: Ducking and diving.SIMON WATTS: Yeah as you say—ducking and diving on just answering what is quite a simple question. I think the way in which you would articulate it quite simply Minister is have you had assurance from the sector that the rate in which the cost in which you're placing on that sector is going to be covered by the funding envelope that you're providing because that's quite simply the question. So it's either yes or no. Let's not play the sort of left or right back and forth over the net or under the net or whatever—just say yes or no. Is the quantum in terms of this increase within the funding envelope—yes or no? Then I think we can move on and move on to other aspects—which I will do just in the interests of time—which is around clause 8 in regards to the rates.I refer to the departmental disclosure statement. It refers there to the dates in which this conversation was had between the Minister and these parties and the dates are 3 May to 26 May 2022. It doesn't indicate that that conversation was initiated in advance of where we are today. I think that's been the challenge to date in terms of when did we actually clear off. Why was there such a delay or why did those conversations not occur earlier? It's been five long years in order to initiate that conversation. The departmental disclosure statement states 3 May to 26 May—a simple question is why did it take so long to initiate those conversations.The third question I've got again in regards to clause 8 related to the rates is that it states here that the stakeholders sought a larger increase. We're trying to attack this from two angles: one is we're looking for assurance from the Minister that the offer on the table equals that of which the funding envelope that's been provided. The simple reality there is we want to ensure and want to get confirmation because we haven't had a full select committee process. We haven't had the benefit of being able to ask officials about this process. We're ramming this through under urgency and that assurance around the fiscal cost of this is critically important.So my question around the point I'm making around the larger increases—and I acknowledge you might want to not get into the detail. But how far away are we in terms of where these representatives on behalf of this workforce—how far away are we on this because in effect 18 months is a long time and it says here that they sought a larger increase so I'm wanting a little bit of clarity in regards to that point. So those are the three questions on the table—nice and easy. It shouldn't take long to cover those off rapidly and then we can move on to the next tranche of questions which I've got in terms of a number of other clauses.
Little AndrewHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Health): It's an answer I've already given. I'm happy to give it again. I've spelled out what the appropriation is or at least what the cost is of this: $327 million over the four-year period. The cost of the increment that was triggered last year is an additional $40 million. That is what the cost of this is to get these pay increases up. No one is being left high and dry. We've worked closely with the sector on it and I can tell you that the advocate for the providers with whom I have been dealing has been very constructive very clear in his representations about what his sector agrees with and doesn't agree with but equally very clear on behalf of all of the providers that he represents.What the sector is saying is they want to get on with the most important thing which is the pay equity claim. So this provides an increment to the wages and the various providers a thousand of them—a thousand of them—will be funded accordingly to meet these costs as well as the cost of the training as that is taken up. There is nothing further to add by way of an answer to the question about the cost of this. That is the cost of the increase the total increase made up of the increment last year an increment this year and that enables us to get a pay increase to these workers that is not out of step with what is happening elsewhere in the labour market provide some protection for that and enables us to get on with the pay equity claim.
Woodhouse MichaelHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): That opening salvo really does behove a response. The idea that actually understanding what the cost of this bill is on firstly the taxpayer and then secondly potentially on the aged care facilities is not part of the bill I think is an outrageous comment. The very point of the bill is to pay money to people. The problem we've got as a committee of the whole is that because we're rushing this through under urgency and it hasn't had the scrutiny of the Health Committee and the departmental disclosure statement makes zero reference to the cost that means this committee—this committee—has to do that work. And it worries me that the Minister deflects what I think are pretty straightforward mathematical questions about the cost of this legislation. Sure there's no particular clause in the bill that says that's the total sum but that's the effect of the clause in Schedule 2 and I think we need to know it. Now I think Penny Simmonds has made a very good attempt at assessing the potentially harmful effects on a sector that is already on its knees. And it worries me—the Minister hasn't said it but I think his flippant comments about the seduction of comments by Simon Wallace underscore the animosity that this Government has towards the sector because some of them happen to be connected to property organisations like Ryman and Summerset and so on. That is not the organisations we're talking about. It is the organisation that Penny Simmonds is talking about: Presbyterian Support services a religious-based not-for-profit that's already losing a million dollars a year in the Otago and Southland region alone. That deficit could blow out by as much as 50 percent on the passage of this bill if our maths is right and I'm very very happy for our maths to be wrong. In fact I really hope that it's wrong but I haven't heard an answer to the question. What we did hear was OK the 1.9 percent is actually 3 percent. I didn't use Mr Wallace's claim of 9.4 percent. I merely mentioned it but then in my own calculations used Consumers Price Index (CPI). And actually that's a very conservative estimate as I mentioned because health cost in inflation always runs higher than CPI. It is almost gravitational certainty that that is the case. And I'm sure Simon Watts as a former chief financial officer in the DHB went greyer because of the stress of trying to make the books balance of the Waitematā District Health Board a heroic effort and very successful when compared with other DHBs. So it is wrong to suggest that these are (a) questions not related to the bill or (b) somehow based on some seductive numbers that Mr Wallace has come up with. He represents a group of organisations that are caring for our most vulnerable that are on their knees and that want to know whether or not this bill when passed is going to put them flat on their backs.