edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
8. Mental Health Services—Staffing Government Initiatives and DemandIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Minister of HealthMental Health Services—Staffing Government Initiatives and Demand8. IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Minister of Health: Can he confirm that the number of registered nurses working in mental health and addiction services has increased from 3583 to 4206 over the last 5 years—an increase of 17 percent?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Yes I can. The number of registered nurses working in mental health and addiction services has increased at a higher rate than for any other level of nursing. This includes an increase of 23 percent for nurses in addiction services 22 percent in community mental health and those working in hospital-based mental health services have increased by 12 percent. There is always more we can do and the Government continues to work on improving mental health services. Having a dedicated workforce is an important part of our wider plan.Ian McKelvie: What other steps is the Government taking to address mental health issues including the suicide rate?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The suicide rate remains too high particularly the rates for young Māori and Pasifika people. Today I am releasing the draft Suicide Prevention Strategy that goes out for consultation. This strategy will provide an opportunity for individuals and organisations to give feedback to help guide suicide prevention activities. Health services particularly mental health services and Government agencies cannot do this work alone. That is why the draft strategy acknowledges the need for input and engagement right across New Zealand society. Although the overall rate has improved in recent years there is more to do.Dr David Clark: Can he confirm that the number of people accessing mental health services has increased over the same time period by 26.5 percent—far greater than the increase in the number of registered nurses—and as a result of a lack of safe staffing and funding that among other incidents a mental health nurse in Hillmorton Hospital was beaten to the ground last year by an acutely psychotic patient and was off work for 5 weeks?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Well what I can confirm is that assaults are way too high for our mental health workers and unfortunately it is a risk of working in what is a very difficult field. Funding in mental health has grown faster than population growth and inflation but of course—Dr David Clark: Not as fast as need is growing.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: —just listen for a second Dr Clark—we have faced a massively increasing demand. We are treating 164000 people per year. That is up from 96000 people per year a decade ago. That is a huge increase of 68000 people but we are focusing on making sure that people get the services that they need and we are doing that.
5. Police Resourcing—Numbers and Regional DeploymentDr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei) to the Minister of PolicePolice Resourcing—Numbers and Regional Deployment5. Dr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei) to the Minister of Police: What updates can she give about what regions the new 880 police will go to?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): Today the police commissioner announced where the 880 new sworn police staff who are part of our $503 million Safer Communities package will be deployed. As we have been saying since the announcement in February all 12 police districts will be getting more police. I can now confirm that all districts will be getting anywhere between a 7 percent and 19 percent increase in the number of police. On top of this 20 regional police bases will go 24/7 resulting in 200000 extra New Zealanders being covered by a 24/7 police presence.Lindsay Tisch: How many new police will each new region be getting?Hon PAULA BENNETT: All regions will be getting at least 24 new police. For example that member will be pleased that Waikato will be getting 101 new cops. Northland will be getting 66 which is a 19 percent increase. The Bay of Plenty will be getting 69 Canterbury 70 Auckland City 72 and Waitematā 73 as an example and another 80 will be deployed to deal with organised crime around the country.Maureen Pugh: Which police bases are going 24/7?Hon PAULA BENNETT: One of our key Safer Communities commitments is to ensure that 95 percent of New Zealanders are within 25 kilometres of a patrolling police base 24 hours a day. To reach this commitment the police commissioner has announced that 20 regional areas will now have a police presence 24 hours a day 7 days a week and they include—the member will be pleased—Motueka Kaitāia Matamata Wairoa Rolleston Taumarunui Te Kūiti Thames Balclutha Stratford Alexandra and many more.
Arbitration Amendment Bill — First Reading
Foster-Bell Paul; Mallard TrevorPAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): Firstly I want to thank all the members who have made a constructive and well-informed contribution in this debate—in particular my colleagues on this side of the House but also the Hon David Parker and Louisa Wall and Barry Coates from the Green Party. There are some issues that we will obviously need to address in the select committee. As a proud member of Transparency International New Zealand I want to make sure that the extension of a rebuttable presumption of confidentiality does not impact on our proud reputation for transparency and lack of corruption in this country.I think there will be an opportunity later during the select committee process to rebut some of the incorrect statements made by the member Denis O'Rourke. Given that this bill is seeking to enforce confidentiality throughout the whole process should the outcome of an arbitration go to an appeal—and these are private agreements. That was a very good point I think that Louisa Wall made. These are agreements made voluntarily between two parties. No one is being stifled in this regard and the court will—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I apologise for the interrupting the member but the time has come for me to leave the Chair.Debate interrupted.Sitting suspended from 10 p.m. to 9. a.m. (Thursday)
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): It is my pleasure tonight to stand up as a member of the Justice and Electoral Committee to welcome the Arbitration Amendment Bill into the House in its first reading here tonight. I do look forward as my colleagues have said to further scrutiny of this bill at the select committee stage. Being not of a legal background I too look forward to the input of our Law Society colleagues of the Queen's Counsel and mostly of our advisors to the committee because we will be relying on their expertise to guide us through this process. I acknowledge my colleague Paul Foster-Bell for bringing this member's bill to the House and I congratulate him on having it drawn from the ballot.This bill is an alternative to dispute resolution and as we have heard tonight there is quite a lot of focus placed on the issue of confidentiality and this bill introduces the presumption of confidentiality. It is also vital to know for the people involved in these dispute resolutions that the arbitration process cannot be used as a lever or a form of blackmail even to take cases further into the court system where the confidentiality is lost and therefore intellectual property and private business information can become public in that forum. That can have a devastating effect on a business particularly if it is publicly listed and its share price can be affected and deals can be cancelled—and that can be irrespective of the substance of the dispute.There is another aspect to this bill and it is that those arbitration decisions are more enforceable. The bill also allows for this process because it is more timely to free up our court system. Of course when that saves time in the court system it in turn saves money for everyone involved. We need this process and confidentiality so that people approach it in a spirit of good faith.There is also a strengthening in this bill of the enforceability of awards. At the moment courts can be reluctant to enforce awards if there are slight procedural matters that may not have been dealt to as well as they could be. Having a strengthening of that aspect is also beneficial to all parties involved.One of the more important aspects of this bill is that it brings us into line with international arbitration and the procedures used. As a trading nation this is particularly helpful to us because we are known throughout the world as an honest and respectful country to trade with and in order to maintain that reputation internationally adjustments to our legal framework just procedurally—and the Arbitration Act 1996 is the one that I am referring to—make good sense in bringing us into line with the rest of the world. We want to maintain that respected and honest reputation with our trading partners.I have great pleasure in supporting this bill as do most of my colleagues here in the House tonight and I have pleasure in commending it to the House. Thank you.
Mallard TrevorThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Sarah Dowie.Clayton Mitchell: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just think it is an appropriate time to commend the earlier speaker for his lack of notes and the eloquent way in which he spoke on this bill. I think it is just another indication of the calibre—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! The member will resume his seat. If the member interrupts another member with a point of order of that type again he will get half an hour off.Hon David Parker: He didn't interrupt anyone.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I had called Sarah Dowie.Hon David Parker: She hadn't started.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! David Parker will now be quiet. I indicated—I called Sarah Dowie. She had the floor and therefore she was interrupted by the point of order. The member should know that. Sarah Dowie—I will let the member start again.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would refer to an earlier point of order by a gentleman who sits behind me at question time who has previously said to the Speaker that an interjection during the time before people start a contribution is not interrupting their contribution at question time. That honourable member was the Hon Trevor Mallard and I wonder whether the same thing applies during speeches at this time rather than question time.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I think the member knows that that sort of consistency is the last refuge of fools. I call Sarah Dowie.
Mallard TrevorThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Before I call Hon David Parker earlier in the day I complimented Jami-Lee Ross on his ability to master his subject and to refer only to brief notes on a first reading speech. I want to add Paul Foster-Bell to those comments. I think the quality of the debate is improved by people who do not just mumble their way through a speech that someone else has written. I want to compliment the member.Hon Simon Bridges: No pressure David.
Mallard TrevorThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Before I call Stuart Nash I just want to place something on the record. I have over a period of time been relatively hard on members who have read their speeches. I think members should note that we have just had an introduction speech on a first reading from a member who was clearly well prepared and had a number of notes but did not read his speech at all. I think it is a very good example not only to other members but also to senior colleagues on both sides of the House.
Mitchell Clayton; Tisch LindsayCLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First): I thought I had 40 seconds but I will take the 30. As this draws to a close I have to say it feels like a battle that we may well have lost when it goes to the vote very shortly but it is not by far. It is certainly not a war that is over. New Zealand First will absolutely continue to fight to ensure that we get the broadcasting of games of national significance live and free to air. As we get close to this election on 23 September we will be telling the people of New Zealand exactly where these people the lobbyists sit—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. His time has expired.
Tisch LindsayBROADCASTING (GAMES OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE) AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 22 March.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Members when we were debating the first reading of the Broadcasting (Games of National Significance) Amendment Bill Clayton Mitchell was speaking and has 30 seconds remaining if he wishes.
General Debate
Urgent Debates Declined — Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority—Inquiry into Conflicts of Interest
Borrows ChesterURGENT DEBATES DECLINEDCanterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority—Inquiry into Conflicts of InterestMr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have received a letter from Dr Megan Woods seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the report and referral to the Serious Fraud Office following a State Services Commission - initiated inquiry by Michael Heron QC into allegations of conflicts of interest and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority and I have received supplementary information in respect of this application. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. As the member notes in her application any application of impropriety relating to the conduct of public sector employees is a serious one. In light of the fundings of the report the State Services Commission has referred the matter to the Serious Fraud Office to consider whether any of the activity is of a potentially criminal nature that requires further investigation. The matter is now with the Serious Fraud Office for investigation. The House is not prevented from debating matters that are under investigation but it is not likely to assist the administration of justice to do so. While this matter may receive further attention from the House in the future I do not consider it appropriate to set aside the business of the House today to debate a matter that has just become the subject of a criminal investigation and the application is therefore declined.
Hudson BrettA party vote was called for on the question that clauses 1 to 4 be agreed to.BRETT HUDSON (National): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. It relates to the vote. We hold a proxy for ACT which I forgot to cast. Could I seek leave to correct that?CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Leave is sought to correct the vote. There is no objection to that.
Tuesday 15 August 2017 - Volume 724
Racing Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Racing Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 105New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 31; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12Green Party 12.Bill read a first time. Bill referred to the Primary Production Committee.
Oral Questions — Urgent Questions
1. Drinking-water Contamination—North DunedinDr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North) to the Minister of HealthURGENT QUESTIONSDrinking-water Contamination—North Dunedin1. Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North) to the Minister of Health: What steps has he taken to ensure the mistakes in Havelock North are not repeated in the latest water contamination scare in North Dunedin?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): The Report of the Havelock North Drinking Water Inquiry: Stage 1 stated that Responses to the August 2016 outbreak were generally well handled particularly by the Hawke's Bay District Health Board". As regards North Dunedin the Ministry of Health is aware of the situation and is being kept informed but it is important to note that this situation is currently being managed by the city council. I am advised that the cause of contamination is not yet known and that no associated illness has been reported at this stage.Dr David Clark: Has the Minister requested a notice in every mailbox or a knock on every door to avoid a repetition of Havelock North where some residents did not learn of the risk for days?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The situation is being handled by the city council. The ministry was advised at 11 o'clock this morning and I am getting further briefings—Dr David Clark: Stay in Rio; leave them to it.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: —but I do not think that is actually going to be necessary in this particular situation. It appears to be quite different from Havelock North and I would encourage the member once again to try to be constructive."
9. Education System—AffordabilityTRACEY MARTIN (NZ First) to the Minister of EducationEducation System—Affordability9. TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First) to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all her comments on education affordability; if so how?Hon NIKKI KAYE (Minister of Education): Yes in the context in which they were made. This financial year our investment in education amounts to over $11 billion the highest ever investment in public education. Funding for schools has gone up by 35 percent since 2008-09 and operational grant funding has increased by 37 percent. In fact no other OECD country spends a higher percentage of public funding on education.Tracey Martin: As the overarching education Minister what reports has she seen regarding the Government's reduction in the post-secondary education budget from 2.9 percent of GDP in 2009-10 to only 1.67 percent of GDP according to Treasury's Budget Economic and Fiscal Update 2016?Hon NIKKI KAYE: I have not seen those direct reports but as I have said before there is a range of different measures out there that show what we are doing in terms of increasing investment from the overall increase from $8 billion to more than $11 billion to other areas of Vote Education such as the affordability studies in terms of early learning which show it is a third more affordable since 2007. There is a range of other measures that are out there that show that we are improving affordability of education.Tracey Martin: As the overarching education Minister does she stand by her statement that We are … incredibly focused on ensuring that we have reform of our tertiary education system."?Hon NIKKI KAYE: I would have to check where those comments were made but if I talk to my colleague the Hon Paul Goldsmith there is a range of different policies that are being looked at including the fact that we have done more than ever to ensure that young people are either in vocational training or in places like Youth Guarantee which is a core hallmark of this Government to help more disadvantaged young people.Tracey Martin: Why are she and her Government continuing to deny that fully funded post-secondary education is affordable as shown by New Zealand First's upfront investment policy which replaces the burden of financial student debt with a skill debt to New Zealand?Hon NIKKI KAYE: I do not think we at all are denying that education is affordable. In fact as I said before there is a range of different measures that are showing that it is more affordable. If you look at early learning it is a third more affordable than in 2007. In terms of school donations I think they are about 1.8 percent of overall funding. In terms of the overall Vote Education it has gone from $8 billion to $11 billion. So it just depends on the different measure that you use."
7. State and Social Housing—Housing Stock and Salvation Army ReportCARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston) to the Minister for Social HousingState and Social Housing—Housing Stock and Salvation Army Report7. CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston) to the Minister for Social Housing: Does she agree with the Salvation Army that the Government needs to increase the number of social houses it builds by 20 times to meet demand?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister for Social Housing): No.Carmel Sepuloni: Why did she only allocate $36 million a year for the next 4 years for social housing which at a maximum will provide only 90 additional houses a year?Hon AMY ADAMS: The member is wrong both in terms of the amount of money available and the number of houses we are providing for.Carmel Sepuloni: Why does the Government not have comprehensive build programmes for high - growth demand areas outside of Auckland like Northland Waikato Bay of Plenty Marlborough and Nelson?Hon AMY ADAMS: Well again the member is wrong. The Government has comprehensive purchasing intentions right across the areas of high demand and in fact the Government is the one that has already committed to building more than 2000 social houses a year which is what the Salvation Army said is necessary and the only group that has come out committing to build only half of what the Sallies wanted is the Labour Party.Carmel Sepuloni: Is she proud of the fact that under the current Government the social housing stock has now fallen to fewer than 5 percent of the total housing stock? Hon AMY ADAMS: Well what I am proud of is that this is a Government that has got a comprehensive plan to deliver social housing across New Zealand and that this is a Government that is committed to building 2000 new social houses a year—more than double what Labour has said it will build. Carmel Sepuloni: Does she accept we would not need so many additional houses if her Government had not sold off 5000 State houses which even when you factor in the increase in community housing is a total reduction resulting in a total reduction of 3000 houses? Hon AMY ADAMS: The House might be interested to know that actually in the time that we have been in Government the number of income-related rent subsidies has increased under this Government from what was in place. If you look at the Salvation Army report that the member's primary question talked about the Salvation Army was the one that made it very clear that it does not matter who owns the houses; what matters is that we are getting the right houses available to the right people and the right support and that is exactly what our social housing reform programme does.
5. Immigration Minister—ConfidenceRt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Prime MinisterImmigration Minister—Confidence5. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Immigration; if so why?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Prime Minister): Yes; he is a hard-working and competent Minister. Rt Hon Winston Peters: When economists such as Michael Reddell former Reserve Bank of New Zealand adviser and Dr Ganesh Nana chief economist at Business and Economic Research both agree with New Zealand First that—[Interruption] No it is no use trying to shout me down—Mr SPEAKER: Order! We will just have the question.Rt Hon Winston Peters: To quote them: Mass immigration is undermining the ability of our economy to achieve productivity growth" and further "setting ourselves up for some significant negative costs over the longer term."—why has this Minister been asleep at the wheel all these years?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: He has not. In fact the Minister has delivered on what is good government for New Zealand and the economy and that is the ability to get the skills into New Zealand for the thousands of jobs that are available. For instance the forecast is that we will build 200000 houses over the next 6 years—that is four times the size of Hamilton—plus the infrastructure so we need the people who are going to be able to build the houses because they have to be built.Rt Hon Winston Peters: How can he have confidence in his Minister of Immigration when fraud and corruption are widespread in the office of Immigration New Zealand (INZ) in Mumbai where it uncovered 265 education agents submitting false information 338 applications used by imposters 340 applications with fraudulent funds and countless other forged documents—all this in just May of this year?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I think that proves that the immigration department is on the job because the reason the member can quote those numbers is that the people got caught. Of course you have to be vigilant in any immigration system because New Zealand has become such an attractive country that people are willing to break the law to get here. They are willing to break the law to get here but we will not let that happen. The immigration department caught those fraudsters and they will face the consequences.Rt Hon Winston Peters: How can he have confidence in a Minister who did not learn the lessons of 2012—for example when there were countless investigations found to be merited into fraudulent visas and when INZ staff were accepting fraudulent applications from family members; was it because that accountant makes him look exciting?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Again in 2012 I think the fact that people got caught then proves that they were on the job. But the most successful part of the immigration policy has been the Kiwis staying home. In the last 5 years 150000 people who were predicted to leave New Zealand actually stayed here and that is success."
Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill — First Reading
Lees-Galloway IainIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): Kumbaya Mr Assistant Speaker kumbaya. Previous members have traversed the contents of this bill and the purpose of this bill. I simply want to reiterate Labour's support for passing legislation in this House that brings us into alignment with other nations. This particular legislation supports our commitments under the Arms Trade Treaty which was ratified by New Zealand back in 2014. Members have raised some issues with the bill. I am sure they will be thoroughly invested by the select committee and we are happy to see this bill progress to that stage.Bill read a first time. Bill referred to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee.Sitting suspended from 9.15 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Wednesday)
Smith StuartSTUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura): It is a pleasure to speak on the Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill. It is quite an unusual thing. I take on board what was said before which was that the purpose of these weapons is actually to kill people but that is the ultimate end use for which we hope they will never have to be used. The deterrent factor in weapons is not to be undervalued. Of course I guess we have not a great example I suppose but from a deterrence point of view there are the nuclear weapons—vast arsenals of them—which have not been utilised at all since the Second World War. So deterrence does work and I think that we have to be aware that it is a big bad world out there and we need to be a part of it.Currently we are operating under a voluntary regime which is the registration scheme for our New Zealand - based brokers but it has no legislative controls to actually regulate that process. We have to do that not only from a good process point of view but because we are part of the wider world and our allies and our trading partners expect better of us than that. So we do need to get our legislation up to ensure that these things are controlled in the manner that they would expect and that we indeed would expect as good global citizens. So I think it is a great step forward for us.It is interesting in that it not only covers military equipment but it also covers civilian goods that may have a military end use which are dual-use goods. If I have the privilege of serving the good people of Kaikōura in the next term and also have the other privilege of serving on the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee I would like to find out a lot more detail about some of the terms that are used in the bill in some of the clauses that were in fact alluded to by my colleague Todd Muller. I think those things will really be of great interest to us all. It is actually incumbent on us that we do a really good job of this because it is so vital with these things that not only do we do the job well but we are seen to be doing it well. New Zealand entities will have to register with the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade and I think it is important that we get all those processes right. I am sure that is the right person.All the other requirements in the bill—are they the right ones? Until we hear some evidence to back all of that up and we hear the pros and cons—which is really the working day-to-day tools of the select committees in Parliament—we will make sure this bill is in a really good space. So with that I commend it to the House.
Rurawhe AdrianADRIAN RURAWHE (Labour—Te Tai Hauāuru): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. I am pleased to take a call on the Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill. I think that as New Zealanders we all feel proud that we like to be responsible global citizens and that we are good global citizens. There are lots of examples of how we do that. This particular bill is one that will address an issue and fix a situation where there is not so much regulation and New Zealand entities and New Zealanders were able to carry out the role as broker for the sale of weapons without too much regulation. So it is a good idea that we enhance our international reputation as good global citizens by enacting this bill into legislation.I look forward to seeing submissions from different groups that are interested in this type of legislation. I would well imagine that the very strong peace movement within New Zealand would make submissions on a bill like this. I expect that those who are interested in disarmament—and as we all celebrated 30 years of nuclear-free New Zealand this year I would say that a number of the people who have supported that legislation over many years will be interested in this particular bill.I think it does our reputation no harm at all to enact a piece of legislation like this. Of course we need regulation. Of course we need to be thinking about the end-user of such products how they are used in the world and the harm that is caused by the use of weapons and related items. That is the kind of thing that I am most interested in rather than the purpose that these weapons are manufactured for which is pretty much for taking people's lives. That would probably be done under the guise of protection more than their actual use but I think we ought to be mindful that that is the purpose of these weapons. It is to take people's lives and we should always be conscious of that matter as a Parliament.I think it is important that that voice is heard within the process of this Parliament and so I highly recommend to the select committee that it take note of those submissions. All submissions are from interested parties and I support my colleague David Parker on his contribution. We will be supporting this bill to select committee and I commend it to the House. Kia ora.
Tisch LindsayBROKERING (WEAPONS AND RELATED ITEMS) CONTROLS BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 6 July.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): When we were last debating the Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill the next call was to go to the Labour Party.
Sage EugenieEUGENIE SAGE (Green): I am taking just a short call for the Green Party on the Racing Amendment Bill. Certainly it makes a great deal of sense to ensure that some of the $300 million that New Zealanders spend each year through overseas bookmakers is directed back to assist the promotion of racing and sports in New Zealand. So that part of the bill is certainly something we can support. But we do as Mr Coates alluded to have difficulties with the working party on offshore racing and sports betting. It did not include anybody from the health sector or anyone who has an insight into the issues of gambling harm and problem gambling.We think that that failure has led to the legislation not being based sufficiently on the recognition of problem gambling and gambling harm. This is because there are provisions in this bill that remove the prohibition on the TAB taking bets during a race. The research shows that where you have got live betting happening it is much more likely to be a prediction of problem gambling. And there is also a proposal in the bill to remove the restriction that requires the TAB to allow bets only on sports that are represented by national sports organisations. So that potentially could lead to betting being allowed on a greater range of sports and it is also potentially going to allow betting on novelty events. All these provisions increase the opportunity for more gambling and potentially the risks for people who have issues with gambling.We support the provisions around putting money back into the industry from those overseas bookmakers. The bookmakers will have to get permission from the Department of Internal Affairs. They have got to get the agreement of the national sporting organisation if they are going to use any of the information that those organisations provide. So there are some good things in the bill. Certainly some of the revenue that is generated can be used to minimise gambling harm but it is on the loosening up of the ability to gamble that we hope there will be significant submissions in select committee and the ability to amend the bill to recognise the harm that gambling can do.
Smith StuartSTUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura): Sorry about that Eugenie. It is great to speak on this bill. Also I would have to say congratulations to the Hon David Bennett. I think he has done a good job. He has been in the job just a few days and he has got this bill before the House. He is a man of action and I think the racing industry will be very pleased with the performance of the new Minister. So it is fantastic.I grew up in mid-Canterbury near Methven. There is a heck of a lot of harness racing down there; not much in the way of thoroughbreds but there are some. But the racing industry while it has been alluded to before as being part of our culture which I think is very much the case I think the fact is that life has moved on and there are a lot of disruptive technologies in the world and actually the racing industry is not immune from that. Overseas betting is taking a lot of the much-needed revenue out of the racing industry and this legislation is vital to allow that revenue stream to be accessed by the industry to give it the much-needed ability to keep pace with its stakes. The stakes are the lifeblood of the racing industry. If it cannot get good returns for the owners the trainers and the drivers then the bloodstock industry will not thrive.Actually the bloodstock industry is the future of the racing industry in New Zealand. It is a huge opportunity for us in exports. It is an industry that gives a heck of a lot of people a lot of pleasure and I would have to say—growing up as I said around Methven—the racing-industry people are great people salt of the earth people. They soon tell you if you are going wrong and they are not shy to point out exactly where. So I think this bill is a great bill. I think this disruption—really it is adapt or die as an industry. And I think this bill is going a long way to ensuring that the industry has the power to adapt. So it is with great pleasure that I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): Well Mr Mitchell you got up and you talked about being a breath of fresh air and for probably about the first 30 seconds of your of speech I thought you were a breath of fresh air. And then you started breathing fire at Minister Bennett. Minister Bennett has been a good Minister. He has taken—Clayton Mitchell: No I didn't. That's not true. That's not true. I was giving him compliments. I was complimenting him.BARBARA KURIGER: Yes you did. He has taken on this portfolio and he has really taken the bull by the horns—to use an expression—or the horse by the reins and he is really making a difference to this industry.Look I also want to mention the Racing Board. It has made a huge effort in terms of working with all of the parties across this House to make sure that we all understand this piece of legislation and what is going on. There is a huge amount of leakage and it is a shame because we have got a fantastic racing industry in this country. We have got a fantastic breeding industry but the problem is those horses will get sold overseas if we cannot actually bring the money into this country to give them the opportunity to race those horses.And you were right Mr Mitchell about the rugby racing and beer because I have got some really good studs in my electorate: Te Akau Stud Breckon Farms and Curraghmore just to name a few. You know it really is about rugby racing and beer because I have got some good craft beer places that are just taking off as well and we are the home of the Chiefs so you really cannot beat that. That is total rugby racing and beer.So look I just want to commend the racing industry. It has put a lot of effort into its breeding and I look forward to it doing really well. I had the opportunity apart from horses to go and have a look at the greyhounds recently as well and they run pretty fast for little dogs. The other thing that I did while was I was there is that I took the opportunity to go and see where they are rehousing the greyhounds that are no longer useful for racing because they are not fast enough. I have to commend the racing industry and those who are re-homing those greyhounds because they are doing some incredibly good work there in Levin.I did want to mention the contribution by Barry Coates about the problem gambling thing. Look we could strangle our own racing industry by talking about problem gambling and yes for some people it is a problem and I do not want to minimise it for those who have a gambling problem. But having said that people can go on the internet and gamble any time they like. The money can go overseas now and the biggest problem is—the reason why we are enacting this legislation is so that we can bring some of that money back into the country. I have to say that our industries have been pretty good at supporting those with problem gambling as well.So with that that is a short contribution but I look forward to this progressing through the House and I stand here and proudly speak in support of this piece of legislation. Thank you.
Barclay ToddTODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland): It is actually a privilege to speak on this bill and it will be the last contribution that I make in the House as well as a member of Parliament. How fitting given that the racing industry plays such a huge role in my history and in my upbringing. My grandfather Keith Barclay trained and drove racehorses in Gore and my uncle Brent Barclay still trains and drives racehorses just out of Winton.In recognition of the industry the complexities and I think the underrated nature of the sector this bill provides an ability to correct an unfairness that has probably been in place for quite some time. I want to acknowledge the New Zealand Racing Board the Minister for Racing David Bennett and former Minister for Racing Nathan Guy for the work they have done in bringing the sector together and developing this piece of legislation that aims at correcting an inequity around offshore betting.When John Allen came and met with Barbara Kuriger and me probably about 6 to 8 months ago I had not quite appreciated the level of leakage that our sector experiences to offshore betting particularly to Australia. Through the work that the Racing Board under John Allen and the board members have done they have estimated that around $58 million of gross betting profit for a year goes overseas from New Zealanders making bets with offshore bookmakers.The sector is incredibly important to regional New Zealand. There would not be an electorate MP here with a provincial or a rural base who does not have a key aspect of their industry being the racing industry. I know from speaking to my own family but also to other participants in the racing industry across my electorate that this correction is something that they are very much in appreciation of.I just wanted to acknowledge the hard work of all who have been involved. I do not think we can underestimate for one minute the level of complexity and competition—as you will know Mr Speaker from your former primary industry roles—that is held across that particular sector. With almost unanimous support I suspect from the sector itself for this bill to go through it comes at quite a timely time. I just wanted to acknowledge the hard work of the Racing Board the industry participants the Minister and the former Minister. It is great to be able to speak on the first reading of this bill.
Courts Matters Bill and Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill — First Readings (continued)
Carter DavidCOURTS MATTERS BILLTRIBUNALS POWERS AND PROCEDURES LEGISLATION BILLFirst ReadingsDebate resumed.Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members the House is resumed. Before the dinner break and before the valedictories we were doing the first readings of the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill and the Courts Matters Bill. There being no further speakers the question is that the motion be agreed to.Bills read a first time. Bills referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee.
Courts Matters Bill and Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill — First Reading
Kuriger Barbara; Carter DavidBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): I am just going to take a short call on this legislation. While we are on the subject of justice and electoral matters I just wanted to make a special mention of Maniapoto who have been in the House today and signed an agreement in principle. Thanks to all of those involved. I could not think of any better justice for those people in the King Country. This legislation really is legislation that is looking at simplifying and standardising the powers and procedures for the tribunals. It is for our 21 tribunals and I think it is commendable. I have not been on the committee but it is important that we simplify the justice system so that people can understand it as they go through. I commend this legislation to the House. Thank you.Debate interrupted.Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members in accordance with a determination of the Business Committee I call on the Hon Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga to make his valedictory statement.
Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Labour): One of the pieces of legislation that has changed in the Courts Matters Bill has to do with court security. It is fair to say that there is a need for more security than there was when I was a young lawyer. I think the most amusing security incident I can recall was when I was working in Dunedin. These lawless people in the South had a problem with one of the accused appearing in the Southland court throwing a swede at the judge—ha ha!These changes are necessary. They actually do not cure the underlying problem that we have got in our civil courts which worries me and that is that I have always thought that access to justice is largely a function of cost and when the cost of civil processes becomes so high that unless you are legally aided or wealthy you cannot afford to access the system then the civil courts are failing to meet their social purpose.I think we are at that point in New Zealand where our civil courts are not meeting their social purpose. The disputes tribunal is not the answer; its jurisdiction is about: Right we actually have to do something to improve the efficiency of the civil courts." I think there is a real need to take some of these rules from the exclusive control of lawyers and impose some practical methods of bringing civil processes to trial early so that people can get the determination of a judge which they will generally accept and if they do not they can always appeal.With that I am aware that we have got to get on to valedictory speeches. We also support the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill and the Labour Party will be voting in the bills favour."
Reti ShaneDr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): It is a pleasure to take a short call on this the Courts Matters Bill. The goal of this bill is to increase the efficiency of courts and tribunals and it does this in several ways. Firstly it looks to decrease the time to hear and resolve matters it improves the user's experience it seeks to use technology and it increases consumer protections and redress.I would like to elaborate on what some of these things mean operationally. This is an omnibus bill so the Courts Security Act 1999 is one of the Acts that is changed by amendments. What interests me is how we improve the user's experience in court. This is done primarily by increasing the mandate of the court security officers. The bill does this by redefining what specified offences might mean initially. Clause 5 which amends section 2 of the Courts Security Act talks to this and describes an offence under the Crimes Act the Summary Offences Act the Arms Act and section 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act. Of course that is what brings in the paraphernalia and drugs that may come into a courtroom.New section 15(A) wisely talks about the removal of alcohol from a courtroom. New section 18(A) talks about court security officers and their ability to refuse entry or remove people if an officer believes on reasonable grounds—and I take my colleague's point that this will need to be discussed further in the select committee—that the person is harassing or intimidating or is at serious risk of committing violence or damage to property. For all of those reasons they can be refused entry or removed. The next level of intervention if you like is to actually detain people. New section 19(A) talks about how people may be detained. They are able to be detained if they refuse to leave court premises as directed refuse to obey an instruction from a court security officer commit an offence on court premises and refuse to give their full name address and date of birth at the request of a court security officer.The last part I want to talk to is new section 20A in clause 14 which interestingly enough is the power to pursue a person. So for people who are detained and flee a court security officer may and if the court orders must pursue that person while he or she is within a short distance of the court security officer". I am sure that will be discussed thoroughly in the select committee as well—what "pursue" means what "a short distance" means. I think these will be interesting discussions. This is an important bill an omnibus bill and it is my pleasure to commend it to the select committee. Thank you."
Enhancing Identity Verification and Border Processes Legislation Bill — In Committee