edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Mathers MojoMOJO MATHERS (Green): The Green Party will not be voting for this Budget. This Budget is a failure on many levels. It fails to tackle the biggest challenges of our time. As Marama has pointed out it fails to tackle the housing crisis. It will not clean up our rivers. It will not tackle climate change. It even fails to fund the Department of Conservation (DOC) properly despite the desperate plight of our iconic native birds. The report out today by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment highlights yet again the dire situation they face. Four out of five of our native birds are in trouble. One-third is at real risk of extinction. Our unique birds help define our national identity—the kiwi the kea the kākā—and it is not just our birds; many other species are at risk of extinction. New Zealand is effectively a Noah's Ark with thousands of unique and endemic species hundreds of which are critically endangered.DOC carries a huge responsibility not just for us but for future generations. The Green Party wants to see our native species do more than just hang on to survival. We want to see them thrive and flourish. But DOC cannot do that on less than 0.5 percent of the Budget—not when we have a biodiversity crisis and not when DOC has to manage 30 percent of New Zealand's land area and increasing pressure from tourism.In real terms—in real terms—we know that DOC has been underfunded by a total of $422 million since National came to power. Now following the Minister's vehement denials last week we double-checked these figures provided by the Parliamentary Library and our conclusion is unchanged. This year Vote Conservation is $26 million less in real terms than in 2009. By refusing to adjust Vote Conservation funding for inflation National has ensured that DOC has lost the equivalent of 1 year of funding over the last 8 years. We note that Forest and Bird has done its own analysis on a subset of Vote Conservation and has come to the same conclusion: funding has been cut in real terms.No organisation no matter how efficient it is can possibly be expected to deliver the same level of protection for our species on less and less. This is not acceptable. DOC now keeps saying it cannot do everything. Not doing everything means that DOC only does robust population monitoring of a handful of most threatened species. Not doing everything means that DOC is forced to prioritise which of the 800 ecological management units which are areas of important ecological diversity and species to manage. And yet DOC has not even integrated these ecological units with the conservation status of threatened species so it is not able to tell us whether its approach is protecting the critical habitats of these threatened species. It cannot tell us whether it is protecting the habitats of our threatened species because it has not done that most basic high-level planning that is necessary. DOC is so underfunded it has even been forced to close its field office in Hawke's Bay. It goes on and on as to what DOC has been forced not to do—I can compile a huge list. Only the Green Party will fund DOC properly.
Borrows ChesterMr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Members might be interested to know there are 7 hours and 44 minutes remaining. The next call is to Labour—a split call.
Thursday 11 May 2017 - Volume 722
Education (Update) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Education (Update) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 56New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 12.Bill read a third time.
1. Petition of Maire Leadbeater—SubmissionsCATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) to the Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade CommitteeQUESTIONS TO MEMBERSPetition of Maire Leadbeater—SubmissionsCATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green): to the Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee: Is he confident that the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee has heard from all available witnesses on the petition of Maire Leadbeater urging the New Zealand—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not the question that is written before me. I will have the question started again please.1. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) to the Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee: Has the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee heard from all witnesses who wish to be heard on the petition of Maire Leadbeater urging the New Zealand Government to address the ongoing human rights situation in West Papua?Todd Muller (Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee): No. The committee has heard evidence from the petitioner Maire Leadbeater and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Any decision to hear from any further witnesses will be a matter for the committee. Catherine Delahunty: Why did the committee refuse to hear from the West Papuan human rights leader and Nobel Peace Prize nominee Benny Wenda who was available to speak to them today as a first-hand witness on this petition? Mr SPEAKER: Order! That question is not in order. That is a matter for the committee not for the chair of the committee.
11. Free-trade Agreements—Remaining Trans-Pacific Partnership CountriesBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki—King Country) to the Minister of TradeFree-trade Agreements—Remaining Trans-Pacific Partnership Countries11. BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki—King Country) to the Minister of Trade: What recent announcements has he made on New Zealand's trade interests?Hon TODD McCLAY (Minister of Trade): Today I welcomed the Government's decision to ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). It shows leadership with Japan which has also ratified the agreement prior to a business delegation visit led by Prime Minister English next week. Ratification sends a clear message that we see value in a common set of high-quality rules across the Asia-Pacific region and we are keeping all of our options open. The TPP remains valuable both economically and strategically. It will improve access for New Zealand exporters and lower tariff rates across the Asia-Pacific including Japan—the world's third-largest economy.Barbara Kuriger: What are the benefits to New Zealand of greater trade liberalisation amongst the TPP countries?Hon TODD McCLAY: New Zealand has high ambitions for better market access for our exporters and the remaining TPP countries are important. It would be the first free-trade agreement (FTA) with Japan and other countries. If New Zealand is not fighting for better market access for our businesses and our people nobody will. It will be a common set of rules that will create greater certainty for New Zealand companies. The TPP among 11 countries will deliver better access and ensure New Zealand companies remain competitive in these important growing markets.Barbara Kuriger: What are the next steps for TPP countries?Hon TODD McCLAY: I have been meeting with trade Ministers over the last several months to chart a way forward to improve market access. TPP Ministers met recently in Chile where we recognised the value of the TPP and committed to work together to keep markets open. I will be co-chairing a meeting of trade Ministers in Vietnam next week where the next steps for this agreement will be discussed.Barbara Kuriger: What other announcements has the Minister made on trade opportunities?Hon TODD McCLAY: Earlier this week I met with the Vietnamese Prime Minister. We agreed to set an ambitious target of doubling two-way trade to $2.5 billion over the next 5 years. Vietnam has a population of 94 million consumers and trade with Vietnam has tripled over the last 7 years since our FTA came into force so we need to be ambitious for New Zealand and back our exporters to succeed. I have also announced opportunities with the EU the UK the Pacific Alliance Mercosur an upgrade with China and possibilities with Sri Lanka. All of these are part of the Government's ambitious approach as outlined in Trade Agenda 2030.
8. Earthquake Kaikōura—Recovery Progress and Local InfrastructureSTUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister of Civil DefenceEarthquake Kaikōura—Recovery Progress and Local Infrastructure8. STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister of Civil Defence: What reports has he received outlining recovery progress 6 months after the Kaikōura earthquake?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister of Civil Defence): Yesterday I was in Kaikōura with local MP Stuart Smith who is doing a great job of supporting his community through this event and I can report to the House that activity in terms of the response and the recovery is progressing well. Over the last 6 months there has been a massive whole-of-Government approach to supporting the communities through particularly with the recovery and new funding of around $860 million has been invested so far. A few examples—and I apologise if this answer is a bit longer than normal but there is a long list: more than $17.5 million from the earthquake support subsidy has been provided to 862 businesses in Kaikōura Wellington Marlborough and also the Hurunui districts; an additional $1 million grant is now available for businesses in the local region to apply for; $5.7 million has been invested to restore the Kaikōura marina to its full functionality; and the list goes on and on. We are doing a huge amount to support the people in this area as the 6-month mark approaches on Sunday. Stuart Smith: How did the earthquake impact local infrastructure and how are repairs progressing?Hon NATHAN GUY: That is a very good question. Scientists report that land movements and shaking were amongst the strongest ever in New Zealand's history causing widespread damage to infrastructure. Progress reinstating the coastal route which I saw firsthand yesterday—both the road and the rail is progressing very well and costs could be like the Minister of Transport has estimated well over $1 billion. The quake has also caused significant damage to farmland and to fisheries—a major uplift in the coastline and about over 100000 slips on a lot of the local farms. The Government is doing what it can to support the primary sector and other communities through this event.Stuart Smith: What recent Government announcements will help the recovery for quake-struck farmers and growers?Hon NATHAN GUY: It was pleasing to see yesterday that the Minister for Primary Industries made a significant announcement of $5 million of new funding to support quake-affected farmers and growers. This fund will support projects to investigate long-term land use options and also provide professional advisory services for their future land options. It will be administered by the Ministry for Primary Industries and it will make a difference to that community.
4. Broadband Ultra-fast—Announcements and Connection NumbersMAUREEN PUGH (National) to the Minister for CommunicationsBroadband Ultra-fast—Announcements and Connection Numbers4. MAUREEN PUGH (National) to the Minister for Communications: What recent announcements has he made on the Ultra-Fast Broadband programme?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister for Communications): This morning I announced the start of phase two of the ultra-fast broadband (UFB) programme with Hikurangi and Hokitika being the first towns to commence the build under the extension of the UFB programme. In January the Government announced a $300 million investment to extend UFB to another 423000 New Zealanders across a further 151 towns. Having access to fast and reliable broadband is critical for regional towns like Hikurangi and Hokitika and through the Government's investment both Northland and the West Coast will have the same world-class broadband as Kiwis living in other centres.Maureen Pugh: How is the UFB programme tracking against initial expectations?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I am very pleased to report to the House that more than a third of New Zealanders with access to UFB are now connected faster than we had thought. The March 2017 quarterly broadband report released today shows the number of households businesses schools and hospitals connected to UFB has increased 12 percent in the past 3 months to over 367000. We are investing more than $2 billion in world-class UFB and Rural Broadband Initiative programmes which will allow 85 percent of New Zealanders to access UFB by the end of 2024 and provide vastly improved broadband in New Zealand's rural communities.
2. Economy—Growth Official Cash Rate Inflation and RisksCHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister of FinanceEconomy—Growth Official Cash Rate Inflation and Risks2. CHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the New Zealand economy?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Finance): This morning the Reserve Bank released its official cash rate (OCR) decision and its latest Monetary Policy Statement. In leaving the rate unchanged at 1.75 percent the bank noted that global economic growth has improved recently and has become more broad-based. It has helped to boost commodity prices as we saw recently with Fonterra's last Global Dairy Trade auction where prices have risen now for the fourth time in a row. The overall strengthening nature of the world economy is good news for New Zealand. The Reserve Bank's growth outlook for our country remains positive and it says it is further supported by high levels of household spending and construction activity.Chris Bishop: How will this ongoing growth affect the inflation outlook?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Reserve Bank noted today that the factors behind the rise in consumer price inflation last quarter looked to be temporary with food and petrol prices expected to ease in the near term. The bank expects inflation will drop to 1.1 percent over the next 12-month period which is lower than in the previous Monetary Policy Statement. Looking further out inflation is not expected to return to the 2 percent mark until June 2019 which is the middle point of course of the bank's target band. As a result New Zealanders can expect wages to continue to grow faster than inflation which is an established trend under this Government.Chris Bishop: How is the low inflationary environment likely to feed into interest rates? Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The good news for households and mortgage-holders is that the Reserve Bank expects to keep the OCR unchanged until inflation picks up in 2019. Even then it currently expects the OCR to reach only 2 percent by mid-2020. Of course these are projections and cannot take unexpected events into account. The Government has long encouraged households to prepare for an eventual rise in interest rates. They should make financial decisions based on what could be afforded at a slightly higher interest rate not on what they can afford today.Chris Bishop: What risks to the economy did the Reserve Bank identify? Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The main risks identified by the bank were international ones. While the bank has shifted to a more upbeat view of the global economy it notes ongoing risks around surplus capacity and of course extensive political uncertainty. Those international political uncertainties are one of the reasons why the Government is committed to reducing net public debt to between 10 and 15 percent of GDP by 2025. At that level New Zealand will have the capacity to absorb not just external shocks but also any internal shocks like natural disasters without extra taxes and without slashing entitlements.
Education (Tertiary Education and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Mallard TrevorA party vote was called for on the question That the Education (Tertiary Education and Other Matters) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 56New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 12.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Education and Science Committee.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Just as a matter for noting in the House when this bill was first debated the Minister at that time on behalf of the Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment indicated intent to move a further motion which caused some discussion and a ruling from me as I happened to be in the Chair at the time. Since then there has been further discussion and no motion of that type will be moved.The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday 23 May 2017 pursuant to the very good leave promulgated by Mr Doocey. The House adjourned at 5.36 p.m.
Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): It is an absolute pleasure to be talking on the Education (Tertiary Education and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. I know other speakers have come in and traversed a lot of the topics on this bill. I just thought I might home in on just one little area. The main thing I want to start out by saying is that it is appropriate that the Government has focused on making sure that our tertiary education providers are doing the right thing and providing courses that are meaningful especially for overseas students and that students when they come out of those courses have a meaningful educational qualification. It is great that there have been a number of investigations recently to address that issue.This bill obviously covers other areas around tertiary institutes particularly around how they are funded and I think also around improving accountability. I do note that the bill specifically allows the Tertiary Education Commission to set conditions on tertiary education organisation (TEO) funding which will enable the commission to more effectively monitor TEOs and the wider tertiary system. Secondly it will require tertiary education institutions to maintain accurate records of Government funding and how those moneys have been spent.But the bit I like is how this bill actually specifically provides for the New Zealand Qualifications Authority to pursue action against tertiary educational organisations for falsely awarding credits to students who have not been appropriately assessed for those credits. This comes back to the integrity of our tertiary organisations and I think it is fundamental that we do enhance and improve and make sure that our tertiary organisations are regarded as world best practice as most of them are. This particular change in the bill I think should be welcomed and on that basis—and I know there are a number of other great amendments in this bill—I do support the bill.
Rurawhe AdrianADRIAN RURAWHE (Labour—Te Tai Hauāuru): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare otirā tēnā tātou katoa. As my colleagues have said Labour will not be supporting the Education (Tertiary Education and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. I have been in this Parliament for over 2½ years and in that time I think I have spoken on five education bills—this is my fifth one. I thought I would reflect on some of the commonalities between them because there are some and I want to do that to highlight one particular fact in my assessment of this piece of legislation. That is that this bill—and it is only a small bill; not as big as some of the others but there are parts of this like the other bills that I have spoken on in this House that reinforce the privatisation model that the Government is hell-bent on pursuing without actually coming out and being honest and saying it. I look forward to the submissions on this because some of the submissions—I think they were on the Education (Update) Amendment Bill—actually highlighted that fact; they explicitly said it. That was from the New Zealand Secondary Principals' Council. So I look forward to its submission on this along with others.On one bill the previous speaker said that children should be fit for purpose".Carmel Sepuloni: Who said that?ADRIAN RURAWHE: That was Todd Muller in his contribution to the Education (Update) Amendment Bill. I think it was a slip of the tongue because surely—surely—that could not be the position of the National Government; surely it could not be although if it was it would give us some insight into its thinking about constructing these types of bills.Coming to that very fact in this bill as my colleagues have mentioned there are some things that are good and there are some things that are not so good. I want to address the ability for wānanga to be able to use the title in a descriptive way that they are an indigenous university. I think as my colleagues on this side—we are open to that discussion. I am very familiar with the arguments around that. Having spoken to a number of the wānanga there are challenges that they face in being recognised for the level of education that they deliver so I think that is a good discussion to have.I look forward to those submissions and as I have mentioned in the Education (Update) Amendment Bill debate today I want to hear the voice of young people—the young people who need to have their voice heard on this. At the Education and Science Committee only yesterday we were discussing and looking at reports around Māori and Pasifika educational achievement. I want to hear that. I think it is critically important not only that the select committee hears those voices but that we listen to them as well.So I add my voice to that process. One thing I do agree with Todd Muller on is that we need to work collectively and collaboratively to make sure that this is the best piece of legislation that it can be and I look forward to that process. Kia ora."
Muller ToddTODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): It is always an extraordinary slot this is it not—just before 6 o'clock on Thursday—Hon Member: Drivetime.TODD MULLER: —drivetime. The sort of wave of collegiality that flows over this place is quite something. From Tracey Martin's warm wish that we can hold hands together figuratively as parties as we reflect on the various submissions that this fine piece of legislation is going to receive to the extraordinary observation of Catherine Delahunty as she stood up and felt almost a frisson of excitement at the opportunity to be able to support something that the National Government has put forward as solid legislation and of course that very kind offer from Kris Faafoi to hand me his notes on font size 26 so there would be no problem with me reading it—very good.I am actually just going to talk about one particular part—it has been very well canvassed all the various components of this and as we have already said significant debate will ensue when we move to the select committee presently—and that is the section on international education and the proposals within the legislation in respect of managing international student misconduct. I have a particular interest in this because the school that had experience in this recently Tauranga Boys' College is obviously in a part of the area that I am from—indeed I used to go to that school many years ago. I felt at the time that the fact that the current model constrained it in my view from effectively disciplining international students in this case in respect of behaviour that occurred outside the school hours seemed to be somewhat nonsensical. So this particular component for me is common sense and I am sure it will assist in providing clarity for those secondary schools that provide very good education for international students.I do hope as we go through the process that we do not necessarily instantly run to our corners and labels. We have a tendency to do that and even at times it has come through this debate. I do hope that between us we will actually have a real solid debate because as we heard yesterday on the select committee when we had the Productivity Commission report there are some profound questions that need to be reflected on with due consideration. This select committee process that we are going to follow is going to assist that. I very much look forward to that process and I support this bill at its first reading.
Sepuloni CarmelCARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston): We will not be supporting this bill. The reason really is that we are disappointed with the fact that this bill just serves to exacerbate the problem that we have in regard to the eroding of our public education system in terms of our polytechnics and our universities and the options the spread and the relevance that we have across our country. Basically that is our concern in regard to what this bill will do. We do acknowledge that there are some provisions in this bill that we support but we cannot support it when it continues to promote a privatised model of competition in tertiary education because that model does not serve us well.The amendments insert a principle of consistent funding treatment into the Act. This will mean that tertiary education providers that offer programmes of study that result in similar qualifications will be funded at the same rate. This is clearly another step in the privatisation agenda that has seen polytechnics being gutted in favour of private providers. The recent contestable funding process has seen a significant transfer of funding from public institutions to private institutions—regional polytechnics and institutes of technology are basically struggling for survival. Public institutions should continue to receive a differential level of funding because among other things their capital investments remain in public ownership. Private establishments are under no obligation to continue to use their accumulated or publicly funded capital for education purposes.I am not on the select committee but we have been kept informed about what this bill entails so we will not be supporting this bill for those reasons amongst others that some of the other speakers have mentioned this evening in the House.
Doocey Matt; Mallard TrevorMATT DOOCEY (Third Whip—National): Could I seek leave for the House to adjourn at the conclusion of this debate or at 6 o'clock whichever is earlier?The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): You certainly can. Is there any objection to that? No one is foolish enough. There appears to be no objection.
Goodhew JoHon JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata): I am going to rise and take a quick call on this Education (Tertiary Education and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and I am going to do so knowing that in the debate that happened on Tuesday the purpose of the bill was discussed extensively. I just want to summarise again that this is about funding flexibility and also as the previous member Tracey Martin has indicated this is about identifying and closing the gaps where there have been issues reaching the courts. It is about strengthening the accountability and monitoring of tertiary education organisations.On consistency of treatment I am going to say that my notes tell me that when it comes to making sure that the management of misconduct is tightened up so that it does not go before the courts my understanding is that it is State and State-integrated schools. Clearly your notes Ms Martin are indicating charter schools as well. No doubt in the course of our collegial working relationship in the select committee we will work through that one but I think we both agree that this needs to be dealt with. In respect of the export education levy however those reimbursement provisions are to cover private and partnership schools kura hourua and that in fact is something that does cover right across.I am going to stop now because I think the important thing is that we have talked about the purposes of the bill. We are going to work together to make sure that we modernise the environment and make sure that it is keeping up and that in fact is what this bill is all about. Thank you.
Mallard TrevorEDUCATION (TERTIARY EDUCATION AND OTHER MATTERS) AMENDMENT BILLSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 9 May.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): When this debate was interrupted Tracey Martin had the call. She had 9 minutes and 55 seconds but because our clocks do not work that way we will give her 10 minutes.
Statutes Repeal Bill — Second Reading
O'Rourke DenisDENIS O'ROURKE (NZ First): Parliament understandably concentrates on making laws. It is what we are here for and we make a lot of law—more and more law every month every year every term of Parliament. I suspect that New Zealand might have more law per head than any other country in the world—I would not be surprised.There is a need sometimes to have a look at the statute book and just say Well do we really need all of that?". That is what the process is that we have before us now. There is a need to repeal redundant laws simply because they get outdated and it is just bad practice to leave that law on the statute book. Of course other law as we know never actually gets used and never gets activated or implemented and we call those latent laws.I notice that of those that are listed the Forests Amendment Act when I read about it—I am not going into the detail but it is obviously thoroughly outdated. That is the Forests Amendment Act 1996. I am talking about a thoroughly outdated piece of legislation. It needs to be expunged from the statute book.Another one I noticed was—and this has already been referred to—the Sentencing Council Act 2007 which did come into force on 1 November 2007 but was never implemented. I am very glad that it was not because it would have set up a sentencing council and I do not think that having a sentencing council to establish guidelines for sentences is a very good idea at all. That is the job of the courts and the establishment of a sentencing council would inevitably have led to political interference in the sentencing system. That is not good for the legal system and it is not good for New Zealand. So I will be very glad to see that latent piece of legislation expunged from the statute book as well.Having said all that we do need to take care when reviewing the statute book and deciding to remove some of those latent or redundant pieces of legislation that that is being done properly and that that legislation is no longer needed or is indeed latent. In this case this bill has been right through the select committee process so we at New Zealand First are satisfied with the recommendation of the Government Administration Committee that those enactments and the parts of them that have been identified to be repealed should be repealed.Finally I do think that Parliament needs to have the discipline of not just making law but also going back and removing and of course repealing laws where necessary and in another process consolidating and updating statutes as well. That is another process that this Parliament has put into place and I think that is very valuable too. As a result of all of these processes I am pretty confident that New Zealand is going to end up with a cleaner—if I can put it that way—statute book and one that retains only legislation that is relevant and not redundant and legislation that is up to date. I hope that will be the result. This will be one good step towards that so New Zealand First will have no hesitation in supporting the bill.Bill read a second time."
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): It is the last call of this debate from the Government speakers and it is up to me to acknowledge the Hon Hekia Parata for all the work that she has done in the educational space and also the Hon Nikki Kaye who has taken up the mantle now as our education Minister. I also would like to acknowledge Jian Yang a person who has done well in the role of Education and Science Committee chair. I know he has facilitated this bill going through the select committee process very well and that that is why we have ended up with the bill in this state. To all those who submitted during the legislative process I would like to thank them for their time as well. I would also like to thank all the speakers today in this debate and commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Naylor JonoJONO NAYLOR (National): It is a great pleasure to rise and take a short call on the third reading of the Education (Update) Amendment Bill. Firstly can I acknowledge the work of the outgoing Minister of Education the Hon Hekia Parata. I think she has done an outstanding job over her time in this portfolio and will probably go down in history as a forward-thinking person who actually had the educational needs of our young people at heart. While there are some people on the other side of the House who may disagree with this I have got a feeling that they are going to be proved wrong in the time to come.I also want to acknowledge Nikki Kaye who has done outstanding work in the Associate Minister role over the last little while. I am sure she is going to continue this forward-thinking innovative-thinking approach to actually delivering better educational outcomes for the children and young people of New Zealand.A fair amount of conversation has already happened throughout this debate and throughout the whole process but I just want to focus very quickly on one particular part of this legislation which was picked up on briefly by the previous speaker Aupito William Sio. The previous speaker said that we were going to be forcing 4-year-olds off to school. That is not what is occurring. What is happening is allowing for cohort entry for children at the beginning of a term at the time closest to their fifth birthday. Some of them will be 5 some of them will be 4 and some of them may be closer to 6. It is going to be a choice that parents will have as to exactly when they want to do it. But what I can say is that we are going to see some benefits using this cohort system. New entrants' teachers are incredible people and if we can make their lives a little bit simpler by having new entrants coming in in cohorts then I think that is going to deliver a better outcome for all.This is a good bill and I commend it to the House.
Goodhew Jo; Tisch LindsayHon JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata): I rise to speak on this debate of the Education (Update) Amendment Bill. I do so—and I am going to stray off what I had planned to say because I need to lay on the record how disappointed I am in the previous speaker Tracey Martin how disappointed I am to be subjected to a lecture. As a member of the Education and Science Committee I take offence at the assertions that this is blind ideology. No we leave that to the Opposition. We leave that to the Opposition which is not interested in future-proofing the education system and which is not interested in efficiency effectiveness and accountability in the education system. I also wish to strongly disagree that this Government does not listen to the parents whose children are in the education system.It was interesting also during this diatribe about everyone being against this bill to read while I was waiting for my turn the regular newsletter Principal Matters written by Whetu Cormick who writes this afternoon that he feels certain there will be engagement with the new Minister having met her on any issues of concern. Interestingly nowhere on that page did I see anything about this bill. Maybe it has been in previous newsletters.However what I do want to say is that the Education Act needed modernising and this Government had the guts to get on and do it. There is still more to be done but putting children at the centre instead of administration at the centre is surely pretty relevant right now. That is where the Government is.I want to add that the members on this side of the House have regular visits to schools too Ms Martin. We listen to principals and we listen to teachers. So do not think in your holier-than-thou way that you are the only person who ever talks to principals and teachers. I am deeply disappointed in that. And so I bring to a close my thoughts on this bill. [Interruption]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! The next call is a split call. Gareth Hughes—5 minutes.
Offices of Parliament — Address to Governor-General
Urgent Debates Declined — Havelock North Drinking Water—Government Inquiry Findings
Yang JianDr JIAN YANG (National): This Government has been focusing on the delivery of Better Public Services over the past 8 or 9 years. Education has always been a priority for this Government and for that reason we have been trying very hard to increase the participation of our young New Zealanders in education and also to enhance the achievement of our young New Zealanders. We have increased our investment continually over the past 8 or 9 years. At the same time we have been trying to modernise our education system. It is important to note that this bill is just one other effort for us to modernise our education system. Just a couple of days ago the Hon Paul Goldsmith introduced his education bill regarding tertiary education and this one is focused on early childhood education and secondary education. The Education Act 1989 focuses largely on the running of schools. This one attempts to focus on the provision of 21st century flexible education. So that is the difference. We are trying to make the achievement and learning of our young New Zealanders an essential part of our education system. How do we do that? We are basically trying to enhance or strengthen the efficiency effectiveness and accountability of our education providers and also to increase or strengthen the collaboration among our education providers. We are also going to establish a future-focused online learning legal framework for our online learning. All these elements are interrelated. To enhance the collaboration among our education providers means that we are able to strengthen the efficiency and the effectiveness and also have more accountability. This bill will provide for new statutory mechanisms for communities of learning. We all know now that we have 197 communities of learning involving well over half a million young New Zealanders and also over 1500 schools and 95 early childhood education centres.Another important part as I mentioned earlier is how to establish a future-focused legislative framework for online learning. It is important to understand that online learning has become increasingly important because of the advancement of our technology. More and more traditional face-to-face schools are now trying to use online learning for their teaching. People can learn anywhere anytime through a variety of delivery methods including online learning.The current Education Act 1989 did not expect such strong growth in online learning and therefore is unable really to somehow cope with the growth of online learning today. That is why we need to update the bill to make sure that we are able to deliver better and also to regulate online learning better.One other thing that I will mention is that this bill also attempts to provide more options to parents. It is important to understand that we are trying very hard to give options to parents schools and even to teachers and this bill is another effort to provide more options to our schools and parents. The cohort entry is a good example. So overall this bill will be able to enable us to provide better education systems to our young New Zealanders. Thank you.
Woodhouse MichaelOFFICES OF PARLIAMENTAddress to Governor-GeneralHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Deputy Leader of the House): I move That a respectful Address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor-General commending to Her Excellency the alterations to the appropriations for the 2016/17 financial year in respect of Vote Audit Vote Ombudsmen and Vote Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and the appropriations and information for the 2017/18 financial year in respect of Vote Audit Vote Ombudsmen and Vote Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. These three offices are known as Offices of Parliament and they serve as independent statutory authorities with specific roles to play. The Office of the Auditor-General is an office that superintends all public expenditure in New Zealand. I would like to acknowledge the appointment of Martin Matthews as Controller and Auditor-General earlier this year. As the public watchdog the office acts as a check and balance on the public sector. Its role is to independently assess the appropriateness of Government expenditure measured against the statements given to this House about how that expenditure will be spent effectively. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment plays an important role in our country. As an independent Officer of Parliament the commissioner's role is unique and quite different to the roles of Government agencies. Under Dr Jan Wright the office has been clear fact-based and pragmatic in its approach. I want to thank Dr Wright for her valuable service as she prepares to retire in October this year. The Office of the Ombudsmen handles complaints and investigates the administrative conduct of State sector agencies including in relation to Official Information Act requests. In Budget 2016 the office was provided with additional funding over 3 years to clear a backlog of aged investigations that had reached an unacceptably high level. Progress on this work has been considerably faster than expected and the backlog is now expected to be cleared by 30 June 2018 a year earlier than originally expected. This is an excellent result and I want to congratulate the office on the rapid progress it has made. I commend the motion to this House.
Carter DavidURGENT DEBATES DECLINEDDrinking-water Contamination—Havelock North InquiryMr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon David Parker seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the findings of the Government inquiry into the Havelock North drinking water. This is a particular case of recent occurrence for which there is ministerial responsibility. The House debated the drinking water contamination in Havelock North when it occurred in August 2016. At that time I ruled that New Zealanders expect to have safe drinking water available that the situation was a serious one and that a debate was required. While the release of a report may warrant an urgent debate this must be exceptional especially where working through a report's recommendations would take some time. I refer members to Speaker's Ruling 215/5. I note that the report is on stage one of the inquiry and identifies what caused the water contamination. Stage two will make recommendations to prevent further incidents. Having considered the report I do not think its findings have such an element of urgency that the business of the House should be set aside to debate it. The application is therefore declined.
Bridges Simon; Hipkins ChrisTHURSDAY 11 MAY 2017Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 23 May the Government will look to make progress on the Land Transport Amendment Bill and a number of other bills on the Order Paper. Budget 2017 will be delivered on Thursday 25 May. CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka): I wonder whether the Leader of the House can give us any indication as to whether he envisages there being any urgency during the next sitting session. Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the House): Well I do not want to interfere with the member's busy social calendar but I would suggest he think about packing a toothbrush just in case.
Tuesday 9 May 2017 - Volume 722
Annual Review Debate — In Committee
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the reports of committees relevant to the Social Development and Housing Sector be noted.Ayes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Reports noted.A party vote was called for on the question That clauses 1 to 10 and schedules 1 to 5 be agreed to.Ayes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Clauses 1 to 10 and schedules 1 to 5 agreed to.House resumed.Bill reported without amendment.Report adopted.
12. Foreign Affairs Minister—Statements on Middle EastDr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) to the Minister of Foreign AffairsForeign Affairs Minister—Statements on Middle East12. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Does he stand by his reported comments that the solution to conflict in the Middle East would be achieved by the people who live there" and that "New Zealand should not pronounce how either party involved in Middle Eastern policy should behave"?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the House) on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Yes. New Zealand has always said that peaceful resolution to the conflict in the Middle East will require engagement by both Israel and the Palestinians. A sustainable solution to conflict in the Middle East needs to be achieved ultimately by the parties.Dr Kennedy Graham: Does the Minister agree with the Prime Minister's comment that Security Council Resolution 2334 of 23 December was "expressing longstanding Government policy in fact a longstanding commonly held international view."?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Yes.Dr Kennedy Graham: In light of the Prime Minister's comments that "I think it's just reflective of someone brand new on the job … being fairly new into the foreign affairs area—you get to learn the Government's positions and the language that goes with that." is he now of the view that describing the resolution as "premature" was incorrect?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I agree with the Prime Minister.Dr Kennedy Graham: Does the Minister agree with Israel's Prime Minister that co-sponsoring the resolution was "an act of war by New Zealand against Israel" or with the British Ambassador to the United Nations that supporting the resolution was an act of friendship with Israel?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Well of course I agree with our Prime Minister that this is simply a re-statement of longstanding New Zealand policy. But can I be very clear: we are committed to moving our relationship with Israel forward. I think there is a number of exciting opportunities for us in innovation agriculture and the like and that is something that we intend doing."
11. Customs Minister—E-gate Expansion ProjectSTUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister of CustomsCustoms Minister—E-gate Expansion Project11. STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister of Customs: What reports has he received regarding the eGate expansion project?Hon TIM MACINDOE (Minister of Customs): I have been advised that 15 new e-gates have been installed and are now fully operational at Auckland Airport's arrivals area. This brings—[Interruption] I am delighted to know that the House is as enthusiastic about this as I am. This brings the total e-gates installed nationwide to 50. This very welcome development—[Interruption] But wait—there is more. This very welcome development for passengers has been made possible due to this Government's $6.6 million investment to more than double e-gate capacity. The nationwide upgrade and expansion is due to be completed in June. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order!Stuart Smith: How do the new e-gates facilitate travel at the border?Hon TIM MACINDOE: Our e-gates or smart gates as many people using them more commonly know them make the customs—Grant Robertson: Thank you thank you.Hon TIM MACINDOE: —I am delighted that Mr Robertson is enthusiastic—process faster and more intuitive delivering a better visitor experience. The smart gates allow—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Get on with it.Hon TIM MACINDOE: The smart gates allow legitimate passengers to complete customs checks easily therefore enabling customs officers to focus on high-risk travellers. The next generation smart gates are faster and use a single-step process taking around 25 seconds per passenger. They are also more accurate using 3-D technology to enhance facial recognition and eliminating the need for the passenger to stand completely still. I am delighted to tell the House that since e-gates were introduced—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Most of us are renowned for our tolerance but this is insufferable. Mr SPEAKER: I can recall very similar questions put to a very eager Treasurer in about 1996 1997. [Interruption] It is part of the process I am afraid.