edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Parker David; Salesa JennyThird ReadingHon DAVID PARKER (Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs): I move That the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.As those who have been following this debate will now know this is an uncontentious piece of legislation that fixes a mistake that was made some years ago which removed the legislative authority for consular loans. The bill therefore allows the Minister of Foreign Affairs to continue the longstanding practice of providing temporary financial assistance to New Zealand citizens and permanent residents overseas who find themselves in distress in exceptional circumstances or when their immediate health and safety is at risk and they are without other means of immediate assistance.Just in respect of the anecdote that we heard from the member David Seymour for the ACT Party about his Washington DC trip I'm sure he would join with me in recalling what a beautiful building it is that Sir Miles Warren designed at the Washington DC Chancery.With that aside I'm not going to say much extra. As others have said the bill does two things: firstly it retrospectively creates an authority for the consular loans that were granted in good faith between July 2013 and June 2020 and secondly it creates a permanent delegable statutory authority for the Minister of Foreign Affairs to issue consular loans rather than relying on the delegated authority from the Minister of Finance that was put in place once this issue was discovered in June 2020. Therefore I commend the bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that the motion be agreed to.
Salesa Jenny; Seymour DavidClause 6 New Schedule 1 insertedCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): This is the debate on the new Schedule 1 to be inserted into the Foreign Affairs Act 1988—clause 6. The question is that clause 6 stand part.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Point of order. I seek leave for the remaining clauses to be taken as one debate.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Is there any objection to the motion. No objections. Clauses 6 to 8 and the ScheduleCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that clauses 6 7 and 8 and the Schedule stand part.Clauses 6 to 8 and the Schedule agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment.House resumed.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Madam Speaker the committee has considered the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill and reports it without amendment. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill is set down for third reading immediately.
Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill — In Committee
Seymour David; Parker DavidClause 5 New section 12A inserted (Consular loans)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): This is the debate on the new section 12A to be inserted into the Foreign Affairs Act 1988 (Consular Loans)". The question is that clause 5 stand part.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. I just wondered if I could ask the Minister a couple of questions that I'm sure people might be interested to know. Can the Minister give us a sense of the quantum of money and the number of loans that have been made in recent years perhaps in the last two or three years just to give people a sense of how many Kiwis seek help from embassies and consulates overseas and what sort of amounts they borrow?Hon DAVID PARKER (Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs): Yes yes I'm happy to provide that information. Most loans are for under $5000 with a repayment schedule of up to 12 months. In exceptional circumstances a loan can be issued up to $20000. To retain some flexibility the legislative authority is greater than that. In respect of how many loans have been made in recent months at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic around $2.5 million of loans were made. That was mainly to support assisted departure flights back to New Zealand and in some situations some small loans to allow people to shelter in place. And of that over 70 percent has already been repaid. I think from memory I also saw somewhere else that in the period from 2014 to 2020 there were generally less than 10 consular loans per year and the average loan was just over $1000.Clause 5 agreed to."
SpeechIn Committee Clause 1 TitleCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members the House is in Committee for the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill. Members we come first to clause 1. This is the debate on the title. The question is that clause 1 stand part.Clause 1 agreed to.Clause 2 CommencementCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members we come now to clause 2. This is the debate on the commencement. The question is that clause 2 stand part.Clause 2 agreed to.Clause 3 Principal ActCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): We come now to clause 3 and this is the debate on the principal Act. The question is that clause 3 stand part.Clause 3 agreed to.Clause 4 New section 2AA inserted (Transitional savings and related provisions)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members we come now to clause 4. This is the debate on the new section 2AA to be inserted into the Foreign Affairs Act 1988 (Transitional savings and related provisions)". The question is that clause 4 stand part.Clause 4 agreed to."
Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
SpeechDr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Green): Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. I rise in support—it appears with the rest of the House—of the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill on behalf of my colleague Golriz Ghahraman. This is a short and technical bill which we thank the Minister and the officials who worked on it for bringing here for us today.We mihi also to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee and your officials. We understand that there were just two submissions—and one of them just to say thanks. So that must have been a great day at the office—but the main point of course being that no changes were made to the bill from that process.So we note these loans have been going on for a long long time and it is the worst thing to be stuck overseas. I am thankful—I am very very thankful—that we have a mechanism whereby our people can get hold of our consulate or our embassy and make their way home. We saw it with COVID people trying to get back here. You just never know what might happen around the world that gets you stuck.I see that we need to do this. We have to have the explicit authorisation for the changes to the Public Finance Act and that seems all good with us so we commend this bill to the House.
SpeechDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour): Kia ora Madam Speaker. It's my pleasure to take this call on the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill. It's necessary to ensure that the Government has ongoing ability to issue loans to New Zealand citizens and permanent residents in accordance with New Zealand's consular functions. But essentially it just tidies up the legislation to make it fit for purpose. So it's for that reason that I commend the bill to the House.
Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you Madam Speaker. I also welcome the opportunity to speak to the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill. I wasn't part of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee when it was considering this bill so you may be wondering why I'm speaking on it. I was just wondering that myself but we'll do our best for at least a short contribution.In the matter of making loans from consulates overseas to New Zealanders—by which we mean not only New Zealand citizens but also permanent residents as my friend and colleague Simon O'Connor has astutely pointed out—this is a longstanding practice I understand. So to some extent it's merely providing authority for that which has already been taking place not only on the basis of that going forward but also to validate retrospectively or retroactively that which has already been taking place. I think that's a worthwhile endeavour for our Parliament.I'm reminded of course of the famous Shakespearean maxim Neither a borrower nor a lender be." I think the reticence of the select committee to broaden the eligibility of lending reflects that we should rightly be reasonably tight in the circumstances in which the State would lend money to those who need help only because we need to demonstrate clearly that they do need help. And of course that quote is from the famous Hamlet play. And for fans of Hamlet they might have noticed there's a new section 2AA. So at some point the drafters have a decision whether to insert a clause 2B or not to insert a clause 2B!But anyway with probably more on Hamlet and less on the bill I think I'm perhaps the wrong "Bill" actually—for those fans of the Bard. I think I should probably leave my contribution at around about that and only add that we commend the bill to the House."
SpeechIBRAHIM OMER (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker it's a pleasure to rise to take a call on the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill. This bill provides express statutory authority for the Minister of Foreign Affairs to continue the practice of issuing consular loans in exceptional circumstances to New Zealand citizens and permanent residents in distress overseas as the last resort. This is a practice that's been going on for the last 25 years. The Minister has been assisting New Zealanders overseas. The need of this was highlighted during the pandemic where about 300-plus New Zealanders were assisted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade so amending this legislation is timely.I'd like to thank the two submitters who submitted to the committee. One of them was asking for permanent residence to be included in this legislation and the second one simply expressing his gratitude and saying that this bill provides him with comfort. So it's a good bill; I commend it to the House.
Webb DuncanFOREIGN AFFAIRS (CONSULAR LOANS) AMENDMENT BILLSecond ReadingHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs) on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs: I present a legislative statement on the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill.DEPUTY SPEAKER: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Kia ora Mr Speaker. I move That the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.It's a pleasure to speak in support of the Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill following its first reading on 26 July 2022. I'd like to thank the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee for their sterling work in the consideration of this bill. The committee tabled its report in November 2022 and it recommended that no amendments be made.The bill is necessary to ensure that Government has the ongoing ability to issue loans to New Zealand citizens and permanent residents in accordance with the New Zealand consular functions. An unprecedented global pandemic and complex geopolitical events have highlighted how necessary it is for consular officials to have the ability to provide temporary financial assistance in the form of a consular loan. This doesn't mean that it's a free-for-all but that specific criteria must be met before a consular loan can be considered—that includes that a person is in distress exceptional circumstances exist and lending money would provide short-term assistance consistent with New Zealand's consular functions.There are two key provisions of this bill. Firstly the bill will create a permanent delegable statutory authority for the Minister of Foreign Affairs to issue consular loans to New Zealand citizens and their immediate family members—and in rare cases permanent residents who are overseas facing exceptional circumstances. Secondly it will create retrospective statutory authority for all consular loans granted between July 2013—which saw a public finance amendment inadvertently remove the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade's legal basis to issue consular loans—and June 2020 when the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade received its current delegated authority from the Minister of Finance to lend money for this purpose. So the bill simply fixes an anomaly and reestablishes legislative authority for a longstanding practice. It does not seek to create a new policy to issue consular loans but to create ongoing certainty around the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade ability to provide consular loans.In summary the bill does two things: it allows New Zealand's consular officials to continue the longstanding practice of issuing consular loans and it corrects some unintended consequences for consular loans when the Public Finance Act was amended in 2013. Thank you Mr Speaker. I commend the bill to the House.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.
SpeechHARETE HIPANGO (National): Thank you. At this third and final reading it is consensus in the House for this bill to be passed into law. When I have previously spoken in the House both on this bill and the Coroners (Coronial Cap) Amendment Bill back in 2022 I reiterated that justice delayed is justice denied. So with the passage of this bill hopefully justice will no further be denied to the families of the bereaved—the bereaved and the deceased who are the subjects of the coronial court. In closing as when I opened with the second reading of this bill to quote Wallace Bain a coroner speaks for the dead to protect the living.Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
SpeechDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): I want to take my final brief call on this bill to do as the Minister did and as previous speakers have done and mihi to the people who are at the heart of this matter who are whānau of the deceased and who have struggled with the huge delays in the system. I want to mihi particularly to those who came before us at the select committee and thank you for your bravery your courage and your grace in bringing you difficult lived experience in the coronial court before us. We hope that what we are doing will help to alleviate the suffering of other whānau. Thank you for your service. I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'd just like to thank the Minister the Hon Rino Tirikatene for his time in the chair. I do take the point made by my colleague Chris Penk in his Supplementary Order Paper 327 but I believe the Minister is correct that coroners are in a sound position to be making that judgment in respect to that public interest test. The Justice Committee has a very full agenda but I believe for those of us who were there during the hearing of the petition that it's not a submission that we will forget lightly nor are the submissions made on this bill. I believe that that is a powerful statement about the voices of individuals and the voices of community in impacting the legislation in this House and I would very much like to commend this bill to the House.
Tirikatene RinoHon RINO TIRIKATENE (Minister for Courts): Madam Chair thank you for the opportunity to open this committee stage of the Coroners Amendment Bill. Can I thank the members for their contributions at second reading. I think they clearly demonstrated the depth of understanding and concern that they had which ultimately led to some very very sound amendments that have been made to this bill. As has been traversed this bill aims to reduce the distress faced by families and whānau from the increasing length of time they spend waiting to receive coronial findings. The targeted amendments to the Coroners Act made through this bill are designed to reduce the time it takes for certain types of cases to move through the coronial process and free up coroners to work on reducing the number of active cases. The bill will also help to ensure that the public interest in reducing the chances of further deaths occurring in similar circumstances is well served. Part 1 of the bill contains the principal amendments to the Coroners Act together with the transitional provisions for one amendment. A big major part of Part 1 is the creation of the associate coroner's role. That is in essence a role that performs all of the roles and duties of the coroner except for the inquests—being able to approve whether an inquest is required and ultimately undertake that role. So that is a very much an important new addition. This bill is all about—as I've mentioned—ensuring that we deal with the heavy backlog of cases that are in the coronial system and to relieve the stress that families do face. And these are sensible amendments.I do understand that the National Party and the ACT Party with their Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) and I thank them for their SOP in relation to—I guess—the discretion that a single coroner has when considering the circumstances and whether that should be included in the written report. As I've mentioned this bill is about ensuring that we get efficient processes. We are able to put less obligations or unnecessary work on coroners to provide written special circumstances when they believe that it's not required. However what I would want to stress is that this doesn't detract from the statutory role that coroners have to do. There is a duty for them to consider the cause of death and the broader circumstances. All this bill does is provide the discretion that when they are considering those broader circumstances to consider the public interest. If they feel that it is in the public interest then those broader circumstances will be included in the report. So I understand the position that you're taking. But I think on balance the policy intent of this bill is to ensure that we get a more efficient flow of cases coming through the coronial system. That's why I regret we won't be supporting the SOP but I'm confident that the provisions of the bill that we have before us ultimately achieve those objectives and ensure expeditious dealing of coronial cases which will ultimately benefit those whānau who are dealing with such difficult circumstances when interacting with the coronial system.
Salesa Jenny; Halbert ShananIn CommitteeParts 1 and 2 Schedules 1 and 2 and clauses 1 to 3CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members the House is in committee on the Coroners Amendment Bill. We come first to Part 1.SHANAN HALBERT (Junior Whip—Labour): Point of order. I seek leave to move all parts to be taken as one.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Is there any objection to that? We shall take this bill as one. The question is that Parts 1 and 2 Schedules 1 and 2 and clauses 1 to 3 stand part.
Williams Arena; O'Connor GregARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. I support this bill because it reduces the time it takes for cases to move through the coronial process and it frees up coroners' time to work on reducing the number of active cases. May I finish the contributions in this House tonight on this reading of the bill by thanking the petitioners to the Justice Committee for speaking with us about the issues within the coronial system. You have made a difference. We have heard your call for change. This bill goes some way to doing that. May I also thank the Minister Rino Tirikatene and his predecessor the Hon Aupito William Sio for taking up the challenge to improve the process. I commend this bill to the House.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Coroners Amendment Bill is set down for committee stage immediately. I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Coroners Amendment Bill.
Coroners Amendment Bill — Second Reading
Mooney JosephJOSEPH MOONEY (National—Southland): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise to speak briefly on the Coroners Amendment Bill. The National Party supports this bill. This will we believe help to achieve reduced waiting times which is a step in the right direction. However some caution is needed as making public recommendations is a vital role of the coronial system and we do not believe shortcuts should be made in this area. Recruiting suitable candidates with the required level of experience and an interest in specialising will likely be difficult due to a limited pool of qualified candidates. It's certainly something we're seeing right across our country at the moment—is this shortage of available workers no matter what industry and this is unfortunately one of those. It's important that we also have good health data and we don't want to see those compromised with more findings of unascertained natural causes as that data is used to inform our decision making in health programmes and is currently considered of high quality and we want to see that continue. So with that I will take my seat but say that we do support this bill.
SpeechANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour): Kia ora e te Mana Whakawā. It's always a privilege to speak in the House. Tonight I speak on the Coroners Amendment Bill. Like other speakers have I acknowledge the leadership of the new Minister the Hon Rino Tirikatene who has taken over this bill from the Hon Aupito William Sio and is shepherding it through the House.I acknowledge that the Justice Committee has made a few changes. I have just recently joined the committee so I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the important work that coroners do as they are one of the final people who actually see the tūpāpaku before the family has an opportunity to say their goodbyes. On that note I'd like to commend the Coroners Amendment Bill to the House.
Halbert ShananSHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote): Thank you Mr Speaker and like the other contributions in the House this evening I would like to support this bill the Coroners Amendment Bill. I know that the Justice Committee is a very thorough select committee in this House—and from across the House as well—and can I acknowledge the members.The Coroners Amendment Bill will amend the Coroners Act 2006 to facilitate better access to justice for families and whānau interacting with the coronial system. We support this bill and I commend it to the House.
SpeechSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Can I actually echo what the member Ingrid Leary has said: Corinda's actually been a very strong advocate over many years on a number of issues including this one. I'm very happy to support this bill and in order to show some I don't know amity to the House so that a coroner's report doesn't say that people were bored to death I'll end my speech there.
Leary IngridINGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri): First I'd like to acknowledge all the families who have interfaced with suicide: it has affected so many New Zealand families including my own. I'd also like to acknowledge Corinda Taylor and the work of my predecessor Clare Curran in this space. What this bill doesn't do is it doesn't change an inquisitorial system that has somehow become adversarial—and it doesn't change the levels of legal support. But the bill goes a long way to increasing access to justice for families in terms of the four changes around coronial associates natural causes the discretion regarding inquests and the focus on cause rather than circumstances. So I acknowledge Corinda Taylor and Life Matters Suicide Prevention Trust; I hope that you can take some comfort in the fact that your work in this area has made a huge difference. I commend this bill to the House.
Tuiono TeanauTEANAU TUIONO (Green): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'd like to join colleagues from around the House in congratulating the Minister in his new role and for shepherding this bill through the House. This is a simple and practical bill and we support it. It solves problems of delay and stress on the coronial system for those who work in it and families affected after a death of their love. A lot of the issues have been canvassed around the House. I'm not on the Justice Committee but I was reflecting on some of the words of the Minister in terms of what the select committee did—and I support it—where they were changing the wording around recording the cause of death as unascertained natural causes where no further investigation or inquiry is necessary". And I think the wording that he had—and people in the Justice Committee please correct me—is to change that wording to "natural causes without intent". I was just reflecting on that because you know those words are very small. They are small changes in words but I know—and maybe all of us know—that when someone passes or when groups of people pass and you don't know exactly what are the causes of their passing as well words become very important. And if you have words which are open to all sorts of other types of interpretation that can just compound the grief and compound the intense pressure of the grieving process. So I do want to commend the select committee for finding other ways to say that or other ways which would actually help to be focused on the families be focused on those who have been left behind. I want to acknowledge the comments that have been made about the coronial system which is overworked and under pressure and under stress and those very real delays in the coronial process and how that impacts upon people as well. I do want to reflect and recall and mihi to Metiria Turei who first brought the coronial inquiry when she was in Parliament and it is good to see that the Minister and the previous Minister as well have been carrying this work with the expectation that this will help families and help those of us who are left behind through that grieving process as well but also trying to help the coronial system get better. And so on that I commend this bill to the House."
SpeechDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Kia ora e te Māngai o te Whare. I too commend this bill to the House. We have a system that is groaning under the weight of the work that it has done. We have not enough coroners and we have too complex a procedure. This bill addresses both of those things. I commend the Minister for bringing it forward. I commend my friend the chair of the Justice Committee and the members of the Justice Committee for working it through and I commend the bill to the House.
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'd like to begin by commending the current Minister for Courts and the former Minister on bringing this important legislation to the House. It's an issue that this House has been petitioned on in the past. This bill at its face is very much about addressing the serious delays in the coronial system but at its heart it is about being respectful of the grief process that many families go through and we did hear from those families at the Justice Committee.It's also about community safety. I do remember in 2015 when three members of a Southland family passed away: eventually their deaths were attributed to a faulty kettle which was actually in 66000 Kiwi homes. It remained for sale until The Warehouse voluntarily withdrew them seven months after the event but had The Warehouse waited for the coroner's findings the kettles would've been sold for another two years. So there are very important public safety reasons here at play as well for us making these changes.The Minister himself has spoken to the recommended changes from select committee so I won't do that. However I will commend this bill to the House.
O'Connor Greg; Chhour KarenDEPUTY SPEAKER: The House is resumed. We are debating the instruction to the committee on the Child Support (Pass On) Acts Amendment Bill. Karen Chhour.KAREN CHHOUR (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'd just like to also speak to the fact that I am also concerned about the processes that have been followed—not just in this bill but in many bills previous to this bill. And it just goes to show the things that I myself have been saying over and over again when it comes to legislation that's going before this House: that efficient due process is not happening. We are not hearing from the people in a proper manner; we're not giving people enough time to come forward and express their views around this particular issue. Even though most parties will stand here and say they agree with the premise of what's going to happen within this bill there still needs to be a proper process where we can sit down and make sure that we get this law right. By shortening this process it's actually insulting to all the groups and all the people that would've wanted to come and make a submission but may not be able to make the time to get here to make that submission. It's not an easy process; it takes time—and some of these charities and groups are very small and don't have the resources to be able to put together something like this in this short period of time and I really think that this needs to stop.This is from a bill that was suggested five years ago as an issue but it's been an issue for well before that. And what I've heard is that This is a very complex issue" and "This is why it's taken so long". Well if it is so complex and it has taken so long doesn't that prove it needs more scrutiny so that we can get it right and so that we can hear from the right people who understand how this works so that we don't get it wrong and we don't end up back in the House fixing a law that wasn't done properly in the first place? All that does is make the children that we're trying to help suffer—because we're changing it again and again and again. Let's get it right the first time and let's stop skipping proper process and make laws that are good and sound and that will not have to come back to this House to be fixed. So I oppose shortening the committee process."
Sepuloni Carmel; O'Connor GregInstruction to Social Services and Community CommitteeHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development and Employment): I move That the Child Support (Pass On) Acts Amendment Bill be reported to the House by 24 May 2023 and that the committee have 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 and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 193 195 and 196.Shortening select committee and reporting back to the House by 24 May means that we can have the bill in place by 1 July and get money into the pockets of sole parents quicker. The reason we have not been able to introduce this bill earlier is due to the complexities in reconciling issues between how the child support and welfare systems are administered. For example the policy design has required separate income charging rules to be developed to account for child support being paid over a forward-looking period while ensuring this aligned with the broader income charging system under the Social Security Act 2018.The legislative design and drafting must be prescriptive and contain limited discretion to allow for child support via the information share to be automatically charged. This requires clearly and tightly defining what is child support income.A number of options were considered to manage this complexity but ultimately the best option to accomplish our objectives was to push forward and implement the core features on 1 July 2023 in order for sole parents to get extra money in their pockets as soon as possible.Because of this approach some additional income charging rules for rarer cases will be considered as part of phase two. This reflects that it is important the Government get these changes in place and ensure that sole parent families can start benefiting from their child support being passed on as soon as possible. In the current economic climate and with the effects of recent weather-related events any extra financial resources for sole parent families could not be more important.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.
Child Support (Pass On) Acts Amendment Bill — First Reading
O'Connor GregDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a real pleasure to speak on this bill which is going to lift thousands of children out of poverty and it builds on the work the Government has already been doing to increase family incomes. Things like the Best Start payment for newborn babies Working for Families increases to benefits and winter energy payments are amazing things and by removing this discriminatory policy we're going to see around 41550 sole parent families financially better off by a median gain of about $20 per week. A fantastic bill and I commend it to the House. Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is That the Child Support (Pass On) Acts Amendment Bill be considered by the Social Services and Community Committee.Motion agreed to.Bill referred to the Social Services and Community Committee.
SpeechTERISA NGOBI (Labour—Ōtaki): Thank you Mr Speaker. This bill continues our Government's work to make sure that we are creating a fairer welfare system that upholds the dignity of people and families and kids. I'd just like to say at this time as well that I want to acknowledge our commitment to do this—of our Minister Carmel Sepuloni. I know this one is close to her heart.We know currently that parents and caregivers who receive sole parent support are not treated the same as others like people on couple rate benefits and people on supplementaries like temporary additional support and accommodation supplement. Currently IRD are collecting that money and offsetting it against their benefit. This is discriminatory and this bill seeks to remove that inequality and the discriminatory process against the sole parent support.This passing on of the child support will lift 14000 more kids out of poverty. We've heard that over 41000 sole parents and their children will now have at least $20 or more in their budget. This is about supporting our kids. This is about supporting all New Zealanders. This is what the Labour Government does. I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechMARJA LUBECK (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. All I can say is that was a real downer and there would be no doubt in our mind that if it were up to a National Government we would probably have the discriminatory policy in place for another 87 years. The National Party is obviously all talk and no action. And so I want to join my colleague Emily Henderson in her rousing speech in acknowledgment of a brave Minister one that is very indicative of a Government that is not afraid to kick the can down the road who actually tackles the long-term challenges make life better for New Zealanders and I commend this bill to the House. Thank you Mr Speaker.
O'Connor GregDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Good heavens! Two extraordinary lessons or rather mis-lessons in economics today. The first from Mr Seymour—I beg your indulgence for one second Mr Speaker. The earlier one was a lesson in what a tax isn't. A tax is not something where it goes to an individual; it is something where it goes to a Government. Maybe Mr Seymour and ACT need to think about that. But now we have had a lesson in economic history. Mr Damien Smith has just spent the last five minutes or so telling us and lambasting this Government for having had this terrible policy that discriminates against single women or single parents—particularly of course that's going to be single mothers. This terrible policy—87 years this policy has been in place. It took this Government to unravel the complexity and to now get rid of it—87 years of Governments. Don't blame us Mr Smith. The question is: why did it take so long? We're doing it. We are relieving this burden from women and from solo parents generally and I am so darned proud to stand here as a member of the Government as a member of the wāhine caucus and as a supporter of Minister Carmel Sepuloni who has championed so many initiatives for women and for mothers in particular through this House. I am so darned proud to be here and I am so darned proud to be a member of the select committee who will do this because I am going to tell you now: why did this take so long within this Government—not the 87 years but the last couple? I have watched tax experts go white when asked why we can't remove this. It is that complex. It has taken this time to get to the point where we have a bill that is workable and by all that is holy we are going to get this thing through in time for July so the money goes into the pockets of the women and the children where it should have been and it should never have been put in such a discriminatory regime. Again and again our women are discriminated against. Under Carmel Sepuloni no more. I commend it to the House. DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a five-minute split call.
SpeechANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour): Kia ora e te Mana Whakawā. It's always an honour to stand and make a contribution in this House but in particular in this case. The bill in itself—Child Support (Pass On) Acts Amendment Bill—it is about the first word that is important: about the child and followed on by support.I want to acknowledge the leadership of the Minister Carmel Sepuloni. It's difficult; this has been a difficult matter to get to this stage and through her passion and her advocacy we are here 87 years since 1936—we are here. And there are four things that I want to speak on in my short contribution: (1) that the bill removes the discriminatory policy that withheld child support payments from parents receiving a sole parent rate on the main benefit—and their children; (2) it passes on about $47 a week or a median of $20. If it's $20 it's $1040 a month—Angie Warren-Clark: A year.ANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI: —a year sorry about my maths. And if it's $47 a week it's $2444 a year. For 87 years these families and children have been robbed of what they've been entitled to. I want to remind the House that this was a recommendation recommended by the Welfare Expert Advisory Group (WEAG) in 2019. And we are here tonight to pass it in urgency—and it so should be in urgency that we pass the first reading and I want to really acknowledge again the leadership of Carmel Sepuloni that we are here. We've gone through a lot of recommendations by the WEAG but we are now here and I want to commend this bill to the House. Mālō.
SpeechANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. Look I'm really stoked to be standing and speaking on this bill. This is about us fixing a longstanding inequity that exists for sole parents out there who have for whatever the reason was—and frankly I think it was a philosophical argument fundamentally about the punishment of single parents—it has happened for many many years. We are looking to fix this.Look this bill is incredibly complex and don't get me wrong I want to acknowledge the Minister for that. I want to acknowledge the Minister because of the amount of work that has had to go on to bring this bill to the House and the complexity that we will be addressing in two tranches.I also want to acknowledge that the member the Hon Louise Upston has spoken of supporting this bill in part and I also just want to acknowledge that we appreciate that. We are working on other things and of course the Training Incentive Allowance will really help get people off benefits and we can't disagree that living on a benefit is not the best for our families.But this bill is actually about helping those sole parents get the same amount of money as any other beneficiary family. That's the bottom line really. Any other family that is a beneficiary family is not having their child support treated in this way and that fundamentally is wrong. It is an inequity that has sat for many many years. I appreciate the member the Hon Louise Upston saying that actually you know it's sat since 2019—well no actually it's sat since 1936. They haven't done it we haven't done; we're now doing it. I commend this bill to the House.
Resale Right for Visual Artists Bill — Instruction to Committee
Sepuloni CarmelInstruction to Social Services and Community CommitteeHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage): I move That the Resale Right for Visual Artists Bill be reported to the House by 31 July 2023.Motion agreed to.
Resale Right for Visual Artists Bill — First Reading
SpeechDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a real pleasure to stand in support of this bill. In Invercargill outside my office on the other side of the road is He Waka Tuia gallery. It's an amazing gallery and I often pop in there on a Friday night when they've got exhibitions opening and there's always some amazing art on display. But the problem we've got at the moment in New Zealand is that after that initial sale by an artist they get very very little recognition financially when their work is on-sold in a secondary market. And that means that sometimes we've got situations where you've got artists struggling on really low incomes while others are financially making a profit from the on-selling of their work.So what this bill does is make sure that visual artists are financially recognised when their work is on-sold in the secondary market in particular circumstances; so if it's being sold by art market professionals—that's professional auctioneers or art dealers—or if it's been bought or sold in publicly funded galleries and museums. And in such cases what we're saying is that we think a 5 percent royalty on the resale price is returned to the artist or following their death whoever they've indicated they want to receive that in their will. And I'd just like to point out to speakers such as David Seymour that this is actually not a tax that's going to be returned to the Government; it's actually a royalty that's going to be returned to the artist who produced the work. And also the other thing is that the resale royalty is voluntary for those that are privately selling the artwork between two individuals. And so it's really important to make sure that what we're seeing is that the financial benefits from the work would get returned to the artist. So it's a really really important bill and I'm very happy to commend it to the House.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is That the Resale Right for Visual Artists Bill be considered by the Social Services and Community Committee.Motion agreed to.Bill referred to the Social Services and Community Committee.
SpeechTERISA NGOBI (Labour—Ōtaki): Mālō e lelei Madam Speaker. It's with great pleasure I rise to take a quick call on the first reading of this the Resale Right for Visual Artists Bill; a bill that is long overdue. I am proud to be part of this Labour Government that truly values the talent and hard work of artists and Aotearoa New Zealand; to be part of a Government who ensures fairness—and essentially that is what this bill is. We know currently that those who buy and sell visual arts on the secondary market make money. But we also know that the artists of those artworks—the original artworks—they don't see any money any profit from those sales and that is not fair. This bill will establish an artist resale royalty scheme in Aotearoa New Zealand and it will provide eligible visual artists with a resale right to benefit from their work. This differs from the current copyright resale right as it's unable to be waivered or transferred away from the artist while they are living. There's a 5 percent royalty payment—as we've heard—that will be collected each time a visual artist's eligible work is resold which is great for the artist. Engagement was sought with a range of experts in this sector and people in this sector and the strong feedback was that there was support for an artist resale royalty scheme—but actually many said again this is long overdue. We know and we've heard that over 80 countries around the world already have this in place: some of them have a longstanding artist resale or some kind of artist resale royalty scheme. And so this is about making sure that Aotearoa New Zealand also offers that to our talented and fantastic artists. I want to also add my voice and say mālō 'aupito to the Minister—the Hon Carmel Sepuloni—and her team for bringing this through to the House and I commend this bill to the House.
Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Mālō e lelei Madam Speaker. I rise to take a brief call in support of this bill which in essence actually provides an entitlement for visual artists to be part of a share of proceeds in situations where there's a resale of their original works. There are two things that I want to say about that. The first is that this is an approach that is common around the globe—that's the first thing. The second is that I think most reasonable New Zealanders would think that it is fair and reasonable to be able to do that.It also establishes a specific scheme that will ensure that that royalty payment that would sit at 5 percent to the artist in situations where the definition covers the particular sale and the visual artist themselves.The bill itself also at first reading establishes a collection agency that does two things: (1) it's a non-governmental agency and (2) it's one that is not for profit. So it aligns itself in a similar vein in terms of what this bill is seeking to achieve: fairness and what would be considered as something that is reasonable. The bill as it's currently drafted would authorise that collections agency to manage the scheme in itself but also would allow for enforcement opportunities around that.So this is something that is common around the world. It is something that is fair and reasonable. I'm sure that the Social Services and Community Committee will be focused on listening to the community as it always does and will engage with this bill in a positive fashion. I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Kia ora e te Māngai o te Whare. It's always a pleasure to listen to an economics lesson from the member opposite and particularly wonderful to hear about the freedom from bureaucracy—ah yes the freedom to starve in a garret if you're an artist. So there are a couple of ways that this butters the bread. It butters the bread of those artists who currently on the whole earn well under the minimum wage. I remember speaking to a very famous young New Zealand artist whose works now sell for tens of thousands of dollars in the Whangārei Art Museum—an excellent place to go members should you be in Whangārei—and this person said to me that she had sold art in the past. She had got all the way somewhere and her car had broken down. She had so little money she had to hock off her artwork. She got just enough to get her car back on the road—I think it was $350. That work is now selling for thousands upon thousands and she doesn't see a cent of it. I think also that Mr Seymour might like to consider—I think the quote was to sell a little bit of butter and beef". It may also be slightly relevant to the bread and butter of the farmers producing said bread and butter. But never mind let's leave that one to the side. This is a relevant piece of legislation to help our artists survive. At the moment and this goes to Melissa Lee's earlier comment about tattooing if you have copyright and if you have a work of art that can be replicated easily—so a book a song a tattoo design—you get copyright on that. If however your skill lies in producing original pieces of art—one painting one carving one piece of weaving a limited edition of prints—you sell that once and you sell it once only and you miss out on the increasing value of your work. Art adds immeasurably to the value of our society. It was I think a reasonably good politician—and even Mr Seymour may agree—Sir Winston Churchill who was told by his leaders and economists in his war effort "We need to cut the arts funding because we want to fund more tanks." and he said "Sure but what are we fighting for?" This piece of legislation enables our artists to keep body and soul and head above water and yeah to earn their bread and butter. I commend it."