edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): It is a pleasure to take a call on the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Bill. It is going to be an interesting conversation when we bring this to the Health Committee because we do have the experience of the Hon Annette King who has a dentistry background and we also have Barbara Stewart from New Zealand First who is very focused in this dentistry area. We have probably established already at this point in time that it is actually not a decision about whether fluoride is good or bad for us. A quote from Professor Sir Peter Gluckman who is the Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor says that It is absolutely clear that at doses used in New Zealand to adjust the natural level to one that is consistent with beneficial effects [0.7 to 1.0 parts per million] there is no risk from fluoride in the water." As someone who grew up on a farm that did not have fluoridated water I can certainly remember my mother having the little tubes of fluoride tablets but probably not as frequently as we needed them to have some effect from them. I am not sure that my teeth have been all the better for not having fluoride as I grew up. So I am looking forward to this coming to the committee.The bill does enable—if it passes eventually which I hope it does—the district health boards rather than the local authorities to decide whether their communities' water supplies are fluoridated because at the end of the day this is a health issue; it is not a local authority thing really in my mind to decide. People are elected there. They do not necessarily have the skills in health or the ability to talk about that sort of stuff as opposed to all the information that goes on in a district health board. I think that when it comes to local authorities making these decisions they are more likely to have a huge amount of lobbyists and they will not all have the ability to be able to make the case back in the other direction.At the moment only 54 percent of our total population receive fluoridated drinking water and that figure has not increased over the last 15 years. So I think there is a real case to be made in that the decisions that are currently being made are not increasing the dental health of our population. It is time to look at a change in the way we do this and I really look forward to the bill coming to the Health Committee after the first reading so we can take some good submissions and come back with a result that will help the New Zealand public. Thank you."
Urgent Debates — Prime Minister's Resignation—Announcement
Speaker's Rulings — Speakers and Presiding Officers—Ministerial Responsibility for Vote Parliamentary Service
Brownlee Gerry; Carter DavidHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This would be an urgent debate on the first occasion after an event has taken place. The event has not taken place. The Prime Minister has indicated an intention but has not resigned.Mr SPEAKER: The announcement has taken place and that is the matter that is important here.
Carter DavidURGENT DEBATESRt Hon John Key—Announcement of Resignation as Prime MinisterMr SPEAKER: I have received letters from the Rt Hon Winston Peters and Andrew Little seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the announcement made by the Prime Minister that he would resign as Prime Minister on 12 December. This is a particular case of recent occurrence for which there is ministerial responsibility.Applications for urgent debate are required to be accompanied by authentication and have been declined in the past because of a lack of authentication. I draw members' attention to Speakers' rulings 205/5 and 205/6. The application from Mr Peters was not accompanied by any authenticating—[Interruption] Order! [Interruption] Order! However the purpose of authentication is to verify the facts in an application for an urgent debate and to make out the case in support of it. In this instance the facts of the matter are well known and hardly require authentication. I am prepared on this occasion to accept the application without authentication. The resignation of a Prime Minister is a very rare occurrence and is deserving of the urgent attention of the House.Mr Peters' application for the urgent debate on the matter was the first one received. I therefore call on the Rt Hon Winston Peters to move that the House take note of a matter of urgent public importance.
SpeechSPEAKER'S RULINGSSpeaker—Ministerial Responsibility for Vote Parliamentary ServiceMr SPEAKER: On 1 December Ron Mark sought a considered ruling on whether the Speaker is a member of the Government for the purpose of appropriations to the Parliamentary Service. The request arose from my ruling on 29 November when I did not permit an urgent debate on the plan for a new parliamentary building on the basis that an urgent debate is a way of holding the Government accountable for an action for which it is responsible and the Speaker is not part of the Government. Subsequently I have received a letter from the Rt Hon Winston Peters on the matter.The Speaker is deemed to be the responsible Minister" for a number of agencies including the Office of the Clerk the Parliamentary Service and the three Offices of Parliament for the purposes of the Public Finance Act 1989. That does not make the Speaker a member of the Government however. Instead it is to provide some oversight of and accountability for the activities of agencies that form part of the legislative rather than executive branch.The only way to become a Minister is to be appointed by the Governor-General on the recommendation of the Prime Minister. I refer members to chapter 2 of the Cabinet Manual. The Speaker on the other hand is elected directly by the House as its spokesperson and presiding officer.The purpose of an urgent debate is to hold the Government accountable for an action for which it is responsible according to Speaker's ruling 207/2. The Speaker is not part of the Government and in recognition of the special position of the Speaker as presiding officer cannot take part in debate or answer oral questions in the House. I draw members' attention to Speaker's ruling 215/7 which states that a second call in an urgent debate always goes to a Minister so that the Minister speaking for the Government has an extra period to respond. There can be no question of the Speaker elected by the House to speak for it ever speaking for the Government.The proposal for the new parliamentary building has not yet been finalised and there is no appropriation to fund it. There will be ways to scrutinise the proposal if it receives Cabinet approval. The funding for the building project would be contained in the Estimates for Vote Parliamentary Service and could be examined in the House and select committee during the Estimates process. The proposed building will also continue to be discussed at the Parliamentary Service Commission of which New Zealand First is a member. However the urgent debate procedure is not available to debate matters for which the Speaker is responsible."
Thursday 1 December 2016 - Volume 719
Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Emergency Relief Bill — In Committee
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 254 in the name of Eugenie Sage be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.
12. Schools Special—Seclusion Rooms and Salisbury School ClosureTRACEY MARTIN (NZ First) to the Minister of EducationSchools Special—Seclusion Rooms and Salisbury School Closure12. TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First) to the Minister of Education: Is she satisfied with the level of support and choice provided by her ministry for students with the highest level of special needs to attain their personal best?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): I am never satisfied that we cannot always improve. That is why last week I announced that a single point of access will be piloted in the Waiariki Bay of Plenty to schools and families that need to access learning support for their children. This pilot is part of the learning support update that I commissioned to ensure that we have world-class inclusive education that puts progress and success for all children and young people at the heart of teaching and learning. The update work which is not yet complete is focused on ensuring that our learning support system is child-centred simple to access and available promptly early and without interruption for as long as it is required.Tracey Martin: Can she confirm that Halswell Residential College is one of the eight that her ministry has been working with over seclusion rooms?Hon HEKIA PARATA: Yes.Tracey Martin: Is the Minister aware that Salisbury School—a school she is considering closing—eliminated seclusion restraint isolation and time out in 2011 and is now a model of best practice? Hon HEKIA PARATA: I am well aware that Salisbury School has done that and I am also well aware that the ratio of staff to students is significantly higher than it is anywhere else in the country.Tracey Martin: When will the Minister announce her decision on Salisbury School's future given that originally she said it would be released in October 2016 or is she waiting until after the House has risen so she can avoid answering questions about how she has left the staff parents and students in limbo awaiting her pleasure?Hon HEKIA PARATA: There is nothing pleasurable about this. No I do not intend to outwait the House. I am very happy to be accountable. The staff have not been left in limbo. The ministry has consistently updated them with where we are including answering further questions that Salisbury School has put to us.Chris Hipkins: Why did this year's Budget allocate $6 million less to the ongoing resourcing scheme which supports the most high-needs special-needs students in our schools than her own Budget bid indicated was required just to maintain the status quo?Hon HEKIA PARATA: The Budget provided $16.5 million to enable more students to access the ongoing resourcing scheme.Chris Hipkins: I seek leave to table the Minister's Budget bid which indicates $22 million was required.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular information. Is there any objection? There is not. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
11. Broadband Ultra-fast—ProgressBRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister for CommunicationsBroadband Ultra-fast—Progress11. BRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister for Communications: What recent announcements has she made on the Ultrafast Broadband programme?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development) on behalf of the Minister for Communications: Last week the Minister released the latest quarterly broadband update which highlights that nearly 50000 new connections were made to ultra-fast broadband (UFB) in the 3 months to September. This means the number of premises connected to UFB has now surpassed 300000 homes and businesses nationwide. Uptake has increased to 28.3 percent so we are now well on our way to having the 36 percent uptake we expected to have for 2019 when the build is finished. People are connecting to fibre more quickly and seeing the benefits of this world-leading connectivity project.Brett Hudson: How is the UFB programme tracking against initial expectations?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The overall deployment of UFB is now 5 percent ahead of schedule at over 69 percent complete around the country with 13342 new end-users added to the market this quarter. Uptake is also tracking above expectations and we are seeing fibre transform communities and businesses right around New Zealand.
9. Regional Economic Development—Southland Regional Development Strategy Action PlanSARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill) to the Minister for Economic DevelopmentRegional Economic Development—Southland Regional Development Strategy Action Plan9. SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill) to the Minister for Economic Development: How is the Government supporting economic development in Southland?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development): Yesterday primary industries Minister Nathan Guy and I attended a meeting of more than 500 people in Invercargill for the launch of the Southland Regional Development Strategy Action Plan. The plan was developed locally in Southland. It is supported by the Government through our regional growth programme which aims to increase jobs incomes and investment across regional New Zealand. It lays out a clear plan to diversify the Southland economy grow the population by 10000 people over the next 10 years and strengthen local businesses. To help achieve these goals the region has identified opportunities to grow sectors like tourism and international education to develop the aquaculture sector and further improve the productivity of the sheep beef and dairy industries.Sarah Dowie: What initiatives are contained in the plan to grow the primary sector?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Agriculture is of course a crucial part of the Southland economy—it is the largest contributor to the region's GDP—but there are opportunities to grow it further by diversifying land use and finding innovative and sustainable ways to grow productivity. We are supporting that work by investing $220000 to develop the skills and capabilities of farmers and promote the uptake of improved farming practices and $300000 towards the development and the delivery of the People Water and Land Strategy which is about maintaining freshwater quality. AgResearch is investing $5 million in the Southern Dairy Hub a new research and demonstration farm that will ensure the local dairy sector can continually benefit from access to the latest science. And we are investing just under a million dollars to investigate the potential for substantially growing the aquaculture industry in Southland to further diversify the local economy.Sarah Dowie: What other initiatives are in the plan and what support is the Government providing?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Along with the release of the plan associate tourism Minister Paula Bennett and I announced a $510000 package to help strengthen the region's tourism industry and attract more visitors to more of the attractions in the region. Although Southland visitor spending is up 3.3 percent in the year to September that is a lower rate of growth than in other parts of New Zealand. There is huge potential to grow this further. We are also investing $440000 to promote international education and skill development in the primary sector and that will assist with the region's goal not only to bring in an additional 3500 international students but to increase the number of students and their families who settle and remain in Southland as the region grows.
7. Disaster Preparedness—EarthquakesCHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister of Civil DefenceDisaster Preparedness—Earthquakes7. CHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister of Civil Defence: How has the 14 November Kaikōura earthquake affected the probability of future earthquakes in New Zealand?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Minister of Civil Defence): GNS Science issued an update about recent observations that were published about a week ago. It has observed an unusual activity involving slow slips essentially the ongoing interactions observed between tectonic plates at the same time on both the east and the west parts of the lower North Island. The heightened activity increases the uncertainty about the likelihood and size of future earthquakes. Since the 7.5 magnitude Kaikōura earthquake GNS Science has advised the public that an aftershock of similar or larger magnitude is unlikely but possible. As members of the House will understand it is not scientifically possible to predict earthquakes. However this ongoing seismic activity is a reminder to us all that we live in a seismically active country and we should always be prepared for a major earthquake. [Interruption] Chris Bishop: This is a cracker—what steps can New Zealanders take to be better prepared for a disaster?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: It is a good question and it is not a laughing matter in these circumstances. The Kaikōura earthquakes have prompted important conversations about being well prepared for earthquakes and tsunami. I encourage New Zealanders to go to the happens.nz website to get information on how to get ready and get through potential disaster. You can always make a plan online in just a few minutes if you wish. It is also important for people to quake safe their homes by doing the things that they have always been told to do: secure tall furniture to walls restrain your television and hot-water cylinders and I would encourage people to visit eqc.govt.nz for tips on how to make homes safer in the event of an earthquake. It is one of those things that too many of us take for granted. We live in a country where these things happen. We should make necessary preparations where possible.Marama Fox: It is my understanding that Ministerial Services staff and Ministers have been supplied with a grab and go bag here in Parliament in the event of a major earthquake; can the Minister let us know whether or not other MPs and Parliamentary Service staff will be supplied with the same kit?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: My understanding is that that is something that Ministerial Services may have done under its health and safety obligations. I am sure that the Speaker who has similar obligations on behalf of members of Parliament will have heard the question and will have his people make appropriate considerations.Mr SPEAKER: I thank the Minister.
6. Water Quality of Rivers and Lakes—Lucas CreekCATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) to the Minister for the EnvironmentWater Quality of Rivers and Lakes—Lucas Creek6. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) to the Minister for the Environment: Does he stand by his statement that Ōkahukura/Lucas Creek is a stream that nobody has ever wanted or tried to swim in"?Hon NICKY WAGNER (Minister of Customs) on behalf of the Minister for the Environment: Dr Smith I understand made this remark in the context that Lucas Creek is a small urban creek in Auckland that Auckland City has a huge challenge to improve its urban waterways and that the council and the community are already engaged in cleaning up this creek. But very little of its length is enough to swim in or to be accessible for swimming.Catherine Delahunty: How does he explain this extraordinary negative statement to mana whenua the Friends of Lucas Creek Sustainable Pāremoremo and the Wai Care group supported by Auckland Council and the Upper Harbour community board which has been putting in hours of work to make the creek safe for swimming again?Hon NICKY WAGNER: We certainly appreciate the work that the community and the iwi have been doing in cleaning up this river but I restate and say that very little of this river is deep enough wide enough or accessible for swimming.Catherine Delahunty: When the Green MPs kayaked four abreast last week on the Lucas Creek and had miles of water around them why was it not possible for us to swim?Hon NICKY WAGNER: I suspect that Green MPs were kayaking in the estuary at the bottom of the creek.Catherine Delahunty: Given that even this river which he wrote off as one that no one was wanting to swim in which I paddled up to Kells waterfall in has been restored by a huge community effort—to be swimmable—why will he not help and amend the national policy statement (NPS) for fresh water to make it a bottom line that rivers are safe for swimming?Hon NICKY WAGNER: Wadable and boatable is a bottom line for the fresh water NPS. It is a bottom line and most New Zealand communities want to make more of their rivers and lakes swimmable and we support that aspiration. We are looking to amend the fresh water NPS on further consultation."
Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Emergency Relief Bill — Third Reading
Simpson ScottSCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): This bill was considered for a relatively short time by the Local Government and Environment Committee but I think during that period of time almost just on 24 hours we did some very good work. Others have spoken in this debate and also during the Committee stage about the changes that we made at select committee. I just want to acknowledge the very good work that was done by a range of people that has enabled us to get to this point so quickly in the House to address this emergency legislation in a way that has enabled a speedy response by a Parliament and a Government that are keen to make progress and assist in every way possible to get the people of Kaikōura Hurunui and the wider region back on their feet again and under way. I would particularly like to acknowledge the submitters who were able to gather together their thoughts—some in writing but many of them over the phone—and present to the committee at very short notice yesterday. Many of the submitters have been of course themselves grappling with issues on the ground in the region for the last 14 or 15 days. That they were able to take the time and be prepared to submit is an even greater compliment to them and their organisational skills.I want to also acknowledge and thank the officials and advisers who gave excellent professional advice to the committee. Finally I want to just acknowledge the good-natured collaborative approach taken by committee members across Parliament. I think that they collectively did a very good job. I am looking forward to working with the committee again next week on the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill. I support this bill; I commend it to the House.
Smith StuartSTUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura): It is great to get to this third reading of this very important bill. I just want to cover a couple of points. This morning I was talking to a farmer from the inland road which demonstrates really some of the advantages of this bill. They have significant fence damage and significant stock- water damage and the ability for them to just get on and make the changes that are necessary from an animal welfare perspective as well as a management perspective when communications are pretty difficult is very welcome. It is very much appreciated by the people within the electorate.I would also like to point out the geographical isolation of a particular group of people who are effectively almost in a governance hole from a local body perspective: the people north of Ōhau Point where there is the most northern slip on State Highway 1 north of Kaikōura and up to Tirohanga Flat which is where Marlborough begins. So between those areas they are part of Environment Canterbury and the Kaikōura council but they are completely cut off from that council whereas they are in fact really a part of Marlborough for all intents and purposes. So to have some flexibility around resource consents and managing the issues that are in front of them particularly around the Clarence River is really very very welcome.The harbour issue is something that is really important. At the moment in South Bay—both in South Bay and the harbour on the north side of the peninsula—the seafloor has come up significantly. It was shallow in the first instance in South Bay; it is now almost not navigable except for an hour either side of high tide—2 hours a day. It makes it impossible really to do anything from that point. There are also cruise ships that plan to call into Kaikōura. The only way those people can get ashore from the cruise ships is by tender. That is simply not an option other than an hour either side of high tide. So something needs to be done quickly.The council has moved quickly. My understanding is it is getting a report from an engineering firm today on possible options of how that might be remediated and that is welcomed. It would simply be unfair for the community to have to go through the normal lengthy processes. That does not mean the environmental constraints and standards that we would normally adhere to will be trampled over—far from it. Those people rely on their environment around them and have a great respect for it and it will not be damaged in any way other than is absolutely necessary. But it will get that harbour up and running again and help greatly for that community and that economy to get back on its feet. With that I commend this very valuable piece of legislation to the House.
Tisch LindsayThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): David Parker's tabled amendment to delete clause 13 is now out of order as being the same as the amendment already negatived. Moving to David Parker's tabled amendment to clause 14(3)(b) this is out of order as being inconsistent with an earlier decision of the Committee. Parts 1 to 3 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.Bill to be reported with amendment presently.House resumed.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.
Browning SteffanSTEFFAN BROWNING (Green): I can see that! I rise to speak on the Committee stage of the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Emergency Relief Bill. I am very pleased to see that there have been a number of changes made because of the submitters. It was very important that fish were included in this bill; it is very important that notices are actually sent to the landowners of properties that would be affected by this bill.But I would like to focus a little bit on Supplementary Order Paper 254 from my colleague Eugenie Sage. It is critical that there is a level of oversight you may say for people who are wanting to initiate proceedings if something goes wrong. I have experience up the Clarence Valley of where people have done the right thing I think of getting in and doing some changes which this bill allows to happen. Although that has been good in this instance at the moment further activity by some may impact on other landowners. I can think of land where roading goes through it or a stream is diverted—not by the earthquake but by the remedial actions of someone trying to correct things for themselves or for their own operation or property—and it actually has an impact on others down the line. You could imagine gravel and rubble pouring across someone else's field and theoretically they are not meant to do that. Theoretically this bill suggests that they should not be doing that but things will happen and people must be able to have redress because it will be after the event rather than before it as we are avoiding this necessity of having to get consents ahead of the operation. The same does go for what will happen in the marine area around Kaikōura. I have been there and I know what is happening in that area and I can see again where you have got the local authorities looking after what they think are their best interests but maybe going a little bit beyond it. There must be opportunity for third parties to have some reach to go for redress out of that. So it will be important for the House to support the Supplementary Order Paper of Eugenie Sage in order to make sure that this anomaly is corrected. Thank you. The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 253 in the name of the Hon Gerry Brownlee be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.
Ross Jami-LeeIn CommitteeJAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for this bill to be debated as one question.The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Leave has been sought for all provisions to be taken as one question. Is there any objection to that? There is no objection.
Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Emergency Relief Bill — Second Reading
Brownlee GerryHURUNUI/KAIKŌURA EARTHQUAKES EMERGENCY RELIEF BILLSecond ReadingHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Minister of Civil Defence): I move That the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Emergency Relief Bill be now read a second time.Bill read a second time.
Brownlee GerryHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Minister of Civil Defence): I move That the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill be reported back to the House by 6 December 2016 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).I think that discharges the necessary commentary. Can I just indicate to the House though that should the committee after its deliberations on Monday think a small amount of additional time is needed then I am sure there would be no hesitation from the Business Committee to make that extension. But in any event we would like to see this passed late next week.Motion agreed to.
Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill — Procedure (continued)
Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill — First Reading
Foster-Bell PaulPAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): E Te Mana Whakawā Tuarua tēnā koe. Making a brief contribution on this Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill in this first reading debate I just want to respond to some of the points raised by the member Eugenie Sage. I think that there have been very careful steps taken to ensure that in amending statutory provisions by Order in Council we are not going too far. You will see in the bill that it has exemptions and it will not be used to override such important fundamental rights and obligations as are provided for in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 or the Electoral Act 1993. I am very fortunate to have a good friend visiting at the moment Professor Christopher Pope who is an academic from Seattle and he was telling me just today that it is important to be evidence-based and scientific in your approach and I agree entirely with that. If we are being evidence-based and if we look back—for the 60 Orders in Council that were issued pertaining to the Christchurch earthquake there were no successful judicial challenges and not all Orders in Council were granted. I think we have a good track record of proceeding in a democratic and transparent way on these matters. These are very important provisions that will be used to improve housing to undertake geotechnical assessments to streamline planning processes and even to provide tax reporting deadline relief to those who have been affected by the earthquake. This is an important piece of legislation and it must pass. Thank you.
McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): It is a pleasure to rise to take a short call on a bill where I follow such a large number of constructive speeches on an issue. By the time it gets to me—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Do not stuff it up.IAN McKELVIE: —ha ha—no doubt the detail has been well explained. But I just want to make a couple of comments. I will comment on some of the features of the bill but I just want to make a comment about some of our past disasters in New Zealand. Often in the past we have reinstated things in a manner that the law allows us to do. This bill will enable a bit of freedom around the thinking around the reinstatement of some assets and other things that have been damaged during the course of this earthquake. It will be hugely practical from a New Zealand perspective. It will be very positive. So I think that is the first point I want to make. The second point I want to make is that the Christchurch earthquake has I guess taught New Zealand an awful lot about reinstating assets and about how we might go about it in an efficient and effective manner. The fact is that some 60-odd Orders in Council have been issued in the Christchurch case. None of them have been challenged and I am hoping that as a result of the chairman of the Regulations Review Committee's long statement on this none of these will be challenged either. I am confident that they will not. So I think it is worth noting that these orders apply only to earthquake-affected areas and only to response to or recovery of those areas. I think the next thing worth recording is that they will expire in mid-2018 and no doubt the select committee will have some discussion around that. In fact the select committee will have some discussion around most of these issues.The other thing that is quite apparent is that many unforeseen issues will arise during the course of this recovery and of course with an earthquake you continue to have aftershocks and things like that. There may well be further damage that we do not understand at the moment. So that is another issue I think is really important. An independent panel will advise this as noted by the previous speakers and I am sure that panel will be competent. I think that we as the public of New Zealand can have every confidence that this whole situation will be handled extremely well by the Parliament and by the Government. I think that the oversight that will be provided for this will be very appropriate. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker—that is my lot.
Simpson ScottSCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): It is a pleasure to take a call on the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill in its first reading. I have got the pleasure of chairing the Local Government and Environment Committee which has been over the last 24 hours or so doing I think very diligent work on the second piece of legislation in a suite of legislative initiatives—this bill is the third—that Parliament this week has been considering on behalf of the people the citizens and the communities of Kaikōura and the Hurunui in a measured but quick prompt response to the needs resulting from the disaster that occurred there some 14 days ago. The trick I guess that we as legislators have to address in terms of the bill that is immediately before us is exactly as the Hon David Cunliffe has addressed in his contribution to Parliament this afternoon. It is about ensuring that the constitutional protocols and securities and proper regulations that go with the primacy of this House in its statute-making authority are maintained at a time of emergency but at the same time trying to balance that propriety against the need for urgent prompt and swift action at a time when pragmatic decisions need to be made. This bill seeks to attempt to do that and I think that the mechanism that has been provided to us in the bill provides a series of appropriate safeguards but at the same time ensures that a swift prompt and pragmatic response by us as parliamentarians can occur to ensure that recovery in the region occurs with the least amount of fuss or number of inhibitors being put in front of that recovery as possible.The select committee is required to report this bill back next Tuesday and so it will be appropriate for the select committee to approach—as we did with the earlier piece of legislation this week—a number of targeted stakeholders and submitters and we agreed in principle in the select committee this morning to do just that. So we will be attempting to do that absolutely as soon as this first reading is complete. We hope to meet as a committee on Monday to hear from submitters and to go over the detail of the legislation but I think that if the work of the committee over the last 24 hours is anything to go by we can be assured that the goodwill and cross-party collaboration that has occurred in the last few days will be maintained in this piece of legislation to ensure that in fact we do maintain those constitutional backstops and checks and balances while at the same time achieving the outcomes that we seek on behalf of the people citizens and communities of Hurunui and Kaikōura.On that brief note I am looking forward to participating with my colleagues on the committee as this process unfolds and to working with the advisers who I might also say have been working extraordinarily hard over the last few days to prepare us with good advice sound advice and very very good direction. I commend this bill to the House.
Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill — Procedure
Brownlee Gerry; Carter DavidHURUNUI/KAIKŌURA EARTHQUAKES RECOVERY BILLProcedureHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I seek leave for the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill to be now read a first time and referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee for consideration for the bill to be reported to the House by 6 December 2016 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).I seek this leave as opposed to moving a motion because the bill is well-known to the House and it will be considered at a select committee for a short time.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Points of Order — Speakers and Presiding Officers—Ministerial Responsibility for Vote Parliamentary Service
Mark RonPOINTS OF ORDERSpeakers and Presiding Officers—Ministerial Responsibility for Vote Parliamentary ServiceRON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wish to raise an important constitutional point of order and I do ask that you not necessarily give a view now but you deliberate on this over the weekend and advise us of your view on the next sitting day—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The point of order will be heard in silence.RON MARK: Thank you Mr Speaker. This relates to the application of the Public Finance Act 1989 where the  'appropriation Minister'—(a) in relation to an appropriation made to an Office of Parliament means the Speaker;". This appears to contradict your view that you are not a member of the Government when you are in respect of Vote Parliamentary Service and especially for the costs involved in the new parliamentary building.Mr SPEAKER: I will give it some very considerable thought over the weekend and come back to the member."
Brownlee GerryTHURSDAY 1 DECEMBER 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 6 December the Government will look to complete the remaining stages of the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill the second reading of the Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Bill the third reading of the Rangitāne o Manawatu Claims Settlement Bill and a number of other bills on the Order Paper. Wednesday 7 December will be a members' day.
Wednesday 30 November 2016 - Volume 719
Residential Tenancies (Safe and Secure Rentals) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Residential Tenancies (Safe and Secure Rentals) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 59New Zealand Labour 31; 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.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Our Work Our Future Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 59New Zealand Labour 31; 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.
Our Work Our Future Bill — First Reading
10. Dog Attacks—Central and Local Government Measures to AddressSCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel) to the Associate Minister of Local GovernmentDog Attacks—Central and Local Government Measures to Address10. SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel) to the Associate Minister of Local Government: What recent announcements has she made on reducing the risk and harm of dog attacks?Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Associate Minister of Local Government): In September I announced a national action plan to reduce the risk and harm of dog attacks in New Zealand. Our action plan responds to the clear concerns in our communities about the increasing incidence of dog attacks and the particular vulnerability of children being severely injured and traumatised by menacing dogs. Under our action plan high-risk dogs and their owners will be subjected to stricter controls and will have a renewed focus on education as well as partnership with local government. Dog attacks are increasing and our national action plan aims to stop this by making homes and communities safer for all.Scott Simpson: What further measures has she announced to encourage better and more responsible dog ownership?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: We are doing more to prevent dog attacks. On 23 November I announced a second round of initiatives to further protect New Zealanders from the risk and harm of dog attacks and to ensure that dog owners understand their responsibilities. Our action plan introduces a range of new requirements for owners of high-risk dogs and includes the development between central and local government of best practice for dog control and a public education campaign. Government funding will help central and local government work together to provide for the neutering of menacing dogs as well as increasing the number of dogs both registered and microchipped. This scheme is now under way in Rotorua and Ōpōtiki and will be rolled out nationwide.Scott Simpson: What are the new requirements for owners of high-risk dogs and how will these help to keep New Zealanders safe?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: Some of the new measures include making sure owners of high-risk dogs are up to the responsibility of dog ownership and introducing harsher penalties for owners of dogs that cause serious injury. Owners of high-risk dogs will be required to keep their dogs in a separately fenced area at home display signs at the front of their property ensure their dogs wear collars identifying them as such and have an ownership licence from the council. To obtain a licence owners will have to have their dog's temperament tested have the property where the dog resides inspected demonstrate an ability to keep their dog under control and demonstrate their understanding of the responsibilities under the local council laws. This side of the House takes the responsibility of keeping our communities safe seriously.
8. Earthquake Kaikōura—SchoolsDr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister of EducationEarthquake Kaikōura—Schools8. Dr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister of Education: What update can she provide on the earthquake-affected schools in Kaikōura?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): I was pleased to have the opportunity to visit Kaikōura Primary School Kaikōura High School and Little Tamariki Montessori Preschool yesterday to see how they are holding up and to reassure them of the support that we have available for them. The local schools and the entire community have been incredibly resilient and have been doing everything they can to reopen the schools and the early childhood providers. They have been supported by the Ministry of Education and all the agencies on the ground and are working hard to return a sense of normality to this part of the country. I am delighted to report that with Kaikōura High School opening tomorrow all six of the Kaikōura schools will have reopened and the nearby Hurunui district has reopened all of its 13 schools and playgroups have been established at some of the early childhood providers.Dr Jian Yang: What support is being provided to the schools of Kaikōura to help them reopen?Hon HEKIA PARATA: Yesterday the acting Secretary for Education travelled with me to Kaikōura to hear firsthand from the schools what specific kind of support they wish for and notes have been taken of that. In general the ministry has provided well-being resources to the schools and has offered to co-facilitate well-being sessions for parents alongside Save the Children which is doing a lot of work down there as well. The New Zealand Qualifications Authority has been working with those schools and students on support such as derived grades to recognise the impact and disruption. Scholarship exams have been rescheduled and provided at the schools that were able to reopen earlier with scholarship history and scholarship chemistry exams taking place this week. Two very experienced principals are on the ground to provide support to those schools that wish to have it and lastly I am very pleased to say that Kaikōura Primary School's recently constructed new modular buildings performed incredibly well with no structural damage and the resilience of the bulk of school buildings has helped all the schools to reopen quickly for their 487 students the parents and the community.
7. Building and Construction Industry—Plumbing Materials StandardsFLETCHER TABUTEAU (NZ First) to the Minister for Building and HousingBuilding and Construction Industry—Plumbing Materials Standards7. FLETCHER TABUTEAU (NZ First) to the Minister for Building and Housing: What reports has he received on substandard building products being imported into New Zealand?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister of Justice) on behalf of the Minister for Building and Housing: There have been some reports of problems with products but they relate to both locally manufactured and imported products. The Government has tightened and is tightening the standards and acceptable solutions in key areas like steel mesh insulation and glass balustrading to improve quality and performance. The advice from the building consent authorities is that although the scale of building activities is booming the proportion of quality problems is no greater than historical norms.Fletcher Tabuteau: What have those reports specifically said about leaky pipes or leaky plumbing being used in the construction of New Zealand homes?Hon AMY ADAMS: My understanding is that the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) did conduct an inquiry in response to complaints that had been made and found no systemic issues with the plumbing fixtures that were investigated.Fletcher Tabuteau: Will the Minister acknowledge that given the warning from Master Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers action must be taken now in order to prevent another leaky homes scenario?Hon AMY ADAMS: We are certainly aware that there have been a number of local manufacturers who are concerned about the fact that we have removed the tariffs on imported products because we do want to see the cost of building coming down. That is part of the reason why the building sector is booming but of course it is important that the quality of the products remains high and we are confident that we have a comprehensive system from the suppliers to the retailers to the building code to MBIE certification to the Commerce Commission to ensure that that remains the case.Fletcher Tabuteau: Does the Minister think a comprehensive system might actually include a watermark standard for plumbing products similar to that of Australia's in order to help protect Kiwi homeowners from another leaky homes disaster?Hon AMY ADAMS: There are a number of product certification schemes that are available or in place but our system relies on the fact that the Building Act requires that before any product can be used on site it has to meet the standards set out in the Building Act. Suppliers have to ensure that all products are properly labelled as being fit for purpose and there is a comprehensive regime to ensure that that occurs.