edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
4. Government Tree-planting Programme—ProgressJENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister of ForestryGovernment Tree-planting Programme—ProgressJENNY MARCROFT (NZ First): My question is to the Minister of Forestry and asks: what recent announcements—[Interruption]SPEAKER: Order! I am going to interrupt and ask members on both sides—both sides—to stop trading comments. Thank you. Jenny Marcroft start again please.4. JENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister of Forestry: What recent announcements has he made regarding the one billion trees programme?Hon SHANE JONES (Minister of Forestry): The 1 billion tree programme is sprouting and shooting forth. In Rotorua supported by the Prime Minister and a host of other Ministers we announced that the stand-alone agency will be located in Rotorua and it will continue to drive the status of the forest industry and move it beyond its current fiscal value.Jenny Marcroft: Why is the new forest agency's head office based in Rotorua?Hon SHANE JONES: It is reflective of the fact that Rotorua is the forestry capital of New Zealand and it's a small part on a bigger journey of relocating various Government functions into the regions. Not only will it connect with the local landowners but in Rotorua with the right husbandry the billion-tree forest strategy will definitely bloom.Jenny Marcroft: How can members of the public and Kiwiblog readers track progress towards the 1 billion trees target?Hon SHANE JONES: We have a new website. That website is being developed in association with one of New Zealand's most successful businessmen Sir Stephen Tindall. That is like a tree counter and as each tree counts greater the popularity will be not only for the forest sector and for careers but also for the modest proponent Matua Shane Jones!SPEAKER: Oh you are allowed irony in answers I suppose.
Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai. Tēnā koutou e Te Whare. I rise on behalf of the Green Party to take a short call on the Education (Social Investment Funding and Abolition of Decile System) Amendment Bill. If I may I would like to acknowledge the member Erica Stanford for a member's bill which I think has been quite thoroughly canvassed in particular by the Hon Tracey Martin which has quite a depth of intention behind it. I know this in particular because as was acknowledged by the previous speaker Denise Lee I did indeed meet with Erica about this.I want to echo the sentiments made by the Associate Minister of Education Tracey Martin in a way that we can kind of bring together the contributions of both the Minister and Denise Lee just previously—the quite fiery and quite heartfelt contributions about the need to work in a cross-partisan way on education. I believe that we're seeing this working quite well and it was manifest in the education summit of the past two weekends. It is indeed I believe far too important for something like the future of our education system the funding of our education system to be something that is deeply partisan.I don't believe it's actually worth overly politicising this as the situation has been well traversed back and forward and the Hansard will indeed note that there are strongly felt views on both sides of this House. But fundamentally the reason that the Greens will not be supporting this bill is because we don't believe that it is necessary to duplicate the work that is currently already happening on the Government benches.I'm very fortunate to be in a position as a first-term backbench MP working in confidence and supply within the Greens as the education spokesperson with obviously the Labour MP and Minister of Education the Hon Chris Hipkins and also New Zealand First MP the Associate Minister of Education Tracey Martin. I guarantee you that all of these things are things that come to mind when we are discussing the future of the education system.I would also just like to note that these kinds of things are evidently really complex and we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater entirely when there are changes of Government. The work that was done by the previous Government is absolutely being taken into account by this one. It is a very complex thing when we're talking about the future and the funding of our education system. I don't think that the proper mechanism for it is by way of a member's bill.So just in summation I would just state that I am absolutely keen to continue my constructive work across the House. So too I believe that the Government has signalled that with the invitation to the Opposition to engage in the likes of the education summit. At the very least it's also been signalled by my colleague the Hon Tracey Martin. So I would like to acknowledge again Erica Stanford for her work on this bill and note that the Greens will not be supporting it. Thank you.
Strange Jamie; Tolley AnneJAMIE STRANGE (Labour): I am sure the time will fly by. Look it's an honour to stand and speak in this House again and this time on the Education (Social Investment Funding and Abolition of Decile System) Amendment Bill. I would like to acknowledge Erica Stanford for her work on this bill. I would like to acknowledge her passion for education and we certainly both share that. Now some people have sort of a natural sense of intelligence and may not need as much education as others. Some people like myself need all the support we can get and education is a key aspect around that. Pink Floyd said We don't need no education" but the reality is we absolutely do and I believe as many in this House do that education is a key driver to lifting people out of poverty and creating opportunity.Now the bill talks about the decile challenges that we have in our education system and as I mentioned before I was interrupted a few weeks ago there are certainly challenges in our decile system. One of the key ones is around the perception of school quality. There is a perception out there that schools on a lower decile provide a lower level of education which is absolutely not true as those of us who have taught in those environments understand. We have absolutely fantastic teachers across all decile systems. But there is this perception. There is a perception around house price values which sort of links into that. So we certainly do need to look at this issue. The reality is unfortunately this side of the House will not be supporting this bill because we don't believe that this bill actually addresses the issues around the decile challenge. Further work is being done on this issue so the Opposition members can sleep easy at night because I understand your passion on the other side of the House for young people who are disadvantaged. The social conscience that exists on that side of the House—I absolutely acknowledge that and I'd like to assure the members that work is being done around this issue.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. The member's time has expired."
Tolley AnneEDUCATION (SOCIAL INVESTMENT FUNDING AND ABOLITION OF DECILE SYSTEM) AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 2 May.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Colleagues when this bill was before the House Jamie Strange was speaking and he has 2 minutes 30 seconds remaining to speak.
Friendly Societies and Credit Unions (Regulatory Improvements) Amendment Bill —Second Reading
Hughes Gareth; Rurawhe AdrianGARETH HUGHES (Green): Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou kia ora. When you look in the last year the big four New Zealand banks made $4.9 billion in profit and over the last 10 years they grew by three times the size of New Zealand's GDP growth in that period over the 10 years. No wonder so many people are looking at credit unions in New Zealand. They're looking for an alternative pathway. In fact there's 194000 Kiwis that are members of credit unions. This is an area the Green Party has always supported in Parliament. We want to support cooperative ventures such as this. So we want to commend and join the unanimous support in this House in commending the member Stuart Smith for his introduction of this bill. It is a smart common-sense step forward.What this legislation does is update the Friendly Societies and Credit Unions Act which dates back to 1982. When you cast your mind back all that way back in history—I mean this was Muldoon's Fortress New Zealand". We had a price freeze in New Zealand; six weeks to get a telephone. You know you had to get Government permission to import money or products or cars. It's such a distant country deep in our country's past. Given I was born in 1981 I'm feeling rather outdated and old-fashioned myself and maybe in need of some modernisation but I commend the member for his common-sense legislation to update this 1982 legislation. The legislation is pretty simple. It brings into line similar effects with other banking and financial legislation. People watching the television tonight mightn't understand the issue of mutuality but it's a very important one. When you cast your mind back even deeper in history the first credit union came to Germany back in 1852 and this has been a core principle in contrast to say the banks which we've seen making such mega profits in New Zealand in the last decade.The second issue of course that this legislation deals with is the subject of the debate tonight which I think we heard from a Labour member—it was described as mickey mouse—the ability to circumvent the existing rules of lending. So we support the intent of this to make it easier for credit unions to be able to lend money to small and medium sized enterprises. We want to see that productive capital going towards investing in innovation investing in entrepreneurialism creating jobs—this is the modern New Zealand. So we congratulate the member. We commend this legislation. We want to thank all those members the public and the experts and members of the credit unions and friendly societies who participated in the select committee. I didn't have the privilege of sitting on the Finance and Expenditure Committee for this hearing but I note there's been a number of common-sense reasonable improvements. It's quite a substantial report. So it's something the Green Party has always supported. We commend the process and we look forward to seeing it pass in subsequent stages. Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Kia ora. This is a split call—five minutes Andrew Bayly."
Farm Debt Mediation Bill — First Reading
Privilege — Consideration of Report of Privileges Committee
Parker DavidPRIVILEGEConsideration of Report of Privileges CommitteeMaritime New Zealand—Action Following Evidence Given to Regulations Review CommitteeHon DAVID PARKER (Attorney-General): I move That the House take note of the report of the Privileges Committee on the question of privilege regarding action by Maritime New Zealand following evidence given to the Regulations Review Committee by the managing director of Maritime Management Services Ltd.Motion agreed to.
Tuesday 15 May 2018 - Volume 729
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 55.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 28 in the name of Simon O'Connor to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 25 in the name of the Hon Carmel Sepuloni to clause 4 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 55New Zealand National 55.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Amendment to the amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 25 in the name of the Hon Carmel Sepuloni to Part 1 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 55.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.Noes 55New Zealand National 55.Part 1 as amended agreed to.
11. Growing Up in New Zealand Study—AnnouncementsANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour) to the Minister for Social DevelopmentGrowing Up in New Zealand Study—Announcements11. ANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development: What recent announcements has she made regarding the Growing Up in New Zealand study?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): Mr Speaker—Hon David Bennett: Oh has she got her notes this time? Good on her!Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Today I announced that the Government would restore more than $1.9 million—SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume her seat. Now Mr Bennett your interjections are very very frequent. Referring to members using notes in the House to answer questions is an area which is totally my responsibility and not for you to comment on. I would like to remind the member that several of his colleagues rely heavily on notes not to answer questions which is quite a lot harder but even to ask them.Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Today I announced that the Government would restore more than $1.9 million of funding to the Growing Up in New Zealand study. Growing Up in New Zealand is the country's largest longitudinal study of child development gathering information over time about what it's like to grow up in 21st century New Zealand. The children and families at today's announcement were relieved to know that they will be able to continue to be part of the study to tell their stories and to share their experiences of growing up in New Zealand.Angie Warren-Clark: What does this mean for the participants in this study?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Today's announcement means that all of the 6800-plus families who have been part of this study since it began can now be invited to participate in the current round of data collection. Our decision to restore funding also comes at a critical point in the project where for the first time this study is hearing directly from the children themselves. Around 2000 child interviews have been completed this year to date and with the new funding interviews of the remaining 4800 children will now be able to be completed.Angie Warren-Clark: Why is this important?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: These families committed to this study for 21 years. To pull a significant number of them out at year 8 after a considerable personal investment poses significant issues with the integrity of the findings and poses ethical challenges. With this funding we won't be doing that. Restoring the sample size gives us time to preserve one of the study's unique characteristics and strengths: its diversity of participants. It will allow us to draw insight across a broad range of communities to develop policy and services that help New Zealand to be the best place to be a child.
8. Education—ProgrammeJAMIE STRANGE (Labour) to the Minister of EducationEducation—Programme8. JAMIE STRANGE (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What actions has the coalition Government taken to work with New Zealanders to develop a future vision of education?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Consistent with our coalition agreement with New Zealand First over the last two weekends Ministers Martin Salesa Henare and I were in Christchurch and Auckland for two education summits involving almost 1600 Kiwis from all walks of life. The summit events are a key part of bringing people into the process of improving and modernising our education system to set it up for the next 30 years. We want to work together with everyone who has an interest in education: students parents teachers employers Māori Pasifika those with disabilities and others from our diverse community. As well as this we're also seeking to engage with people whom the education system has failed. So far nearly 10000 people have taken part in the online conversation and almost 1400 New Zealanders have contributed their views in our summit events.Jamie Strange: How will the discussions at the summit inform the wider three-year programme in education?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: It's important that while we undertake reviews of Tomorrow's Schools and the NCEA put in place a new early learning strategic plan reform the way we manage school property and fix up the vocational education and training sector we need to ensure that we're shaping an education system that meets New Zealanders' hopes and aspirations for the future. The education summit conversations will play a very important role in informing that reform programme.Jamie Strange: What steps is the Government taking to address some of the issues raised in the summit?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: One of the issues that was raised consistently through the summit was lack of available support for those with additional learning needs particularly in early childhood education (ECE). Early intervention services make a real difference to a child's development in learning for the rest of their life. On Sunday the Prime Minister announced that an additional $21.5 million for early intervention services will help nearly 8000 more children get the support they need over the next four years. This extra funding will halve the waiting time for early intervention services in ECE and I would like to thank both New Zealand First and the Green Party for their tireless advocacy to make this happen.
7. Transport Infrastructure—Regional Fuel Tax Impact and Fuel Price IncreasesJAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) to the Minister of TransportTransport Infrastructure—Regional Fuel Tax Impact and Fuel Price Increases7. JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by all his actions and statements on fuel taxes?Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Transport): Yes when described and reported accurately.Jami-Lee Ross: Will he provide an assurance that his Auckland regional fuel tax will only be paid by Aucklanders and not spread to taxpayers outside of Auckland?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I can confirm that it is a regional fuel tax.Jami-Lee Ross: Does he agree with the founder of petrol price monitoring company Gaspy that fuel companies appear to be raising prices ahead of the 11c per litre Auckland regional fuel tax which comes into effect on 1 July?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I haven't seen that report but I will say that this Government is taking action on anti-competitive behaviour by the petrol companies. We're progressing the Commerce Amendment Bill to give the Commerce Commission more teeth. My colleague the Minister of Energy and Resources the Hon Megan Woods called in BP recently over their statements and I've directed officials to monitor any price spreading. The petrol companies can be under no mistake as to what our view is of anti-competitive behaviour. If there are indications it's going on we will deal with it [Interruption].SPEAKER: Order! Order! Can I just ask the Leader of the Opposition to just wind it back a little bit—both frequency and volume.Jami-Lee Ross: If he hasn't seen that report what is his explanation then for why retail petrol prices increased by 9.3c per litre across the South Island over the last month but only 1.7c in Auckland?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: It's true that there is inconsistent pricing within the petrol industry. It is not a perfectly competitive market but our Government's committed to sending a very clear signal to the petrol companies that we want the best possible deal for consumers and we're willing to use tools like the regional fuel tax to invest in a better transport system in our country's biggest city.Jami-Lee Ross: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked the Minister what his explanation was. In fact he was talking to the Minister when I was providing figures so he probably didn't even hear it. He didn't provide any explanation at all.SPEAKER: He both addressed the question and almost certainly improperly replied to the irrelevant interjections.Jami-Lee Ross: Given he's in denial about fuel price spreading as a result of his Auckland regional fuel tax does he accept that he is just as bad as BP and he'll be on Megan Woods' naughty step fairly soon?SPEAKER: Order! Order! Any—Hon Dr Megan Woods: I'll answer it!SPEAKER: No well it's clearly ruled out for irony. The member knows that.
6. KiwiBuild—Developer Interest and Impact on Residential ConstructionMARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister of Housing and Urban DevelopmentQuestion time resumed.ORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSKiwiBuild—Developer Interest and Impact on Residential ConstructionMARJA LUBECK (Labour): My question is the Minister of Housing and Urban Development and reads: How will KiwiBuild—[Interruption] SPEAKER: Order! Order! Sorry. I'm going to ask the member to start again. I'm going to ask members on both sides to stop their cross-the-House conversations while questions are being asked.6. MARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development: How will KiwiBuild help developers build new homes for Kiwi families?Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Housing and Urban Development): Many residential developments across New Zealand have stalled because the developers struggle to find finance on acceptable terms. This is where KiwiBuild steps in to rescue these stalled developments in three ways. One it enables developments that otherwise would not be undertaken to be completed; second it speeds up developments to add to supply faster; and third it enables the construction of affordable homes rather than McMansions that young Kiwi families cannot afford.Marja Lubeck: What interest has there been from developers in the initiative?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Over 150 developers have approached us over the last few months wanting help to get hundreds of their developments off the ground. Partnering with developers will mean we can use the confidence that the Crown brings to build more KiwiBuild houses faster to recycle capital faster and to achieve our KiwiBuild targets with a smaller impact on Crown debt in the near term.Marja Lubeck: Are there any indications as to how many homes will be built through this initiative?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well initial soundings by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) with these developers are very encouraging and we are confident that we will meet our KiwiBuild targets for new affordable homes. We'll have more announcements on this in the next few months.Marja Lubeck: How does he expect KiwiBuild to increase new residential construction?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The stalled developments that we rescue will not only lead to more KiwiBuild homes but also lead to the construction of more open market homes in those developments too increasing supply overall. Forecasting residential construction is inherently uncertain and depends on a number of assumptions but MBIE suggests that KiwiBuild could generate up to $11 billion in additional residential construction over the next four years. We're getting on with building starter homes for young Kiwi families.
4. KiwiBuild—House PricesHon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura) to the Minister of Housing and Urban DevelopmentKiwiBuild—House Prices4. Hon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura) to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development: When he told the media last week in relation to KiwiBuild that The important thing is to have some clear guidelines out there make them transparent and stick to them" what did he mean?Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Housing and Urban Development): What I meant was that it's important to have some clear guidelines out there make them transparent and stick to them.Hon Judith Collins: Why did he raise the price of a KiwiBuild house from his initial promise of $600000 to $650000 and only told New Zealanders about it last week?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: We raised the price points for the maximum prices in Auckland and Queenstown to $500000 for a one-bedroom place $600000 for a two-bedroom place and $650000 for three bedrooms or more. For houses outside Auckland and Queenstown the maximum price is $500000 for all houses. We made the decision based on advice from both industry and the Public Service about what would be the most logical way to do it and then we announced it.Hon Judith Collins: What calculation is he using to show that a $650000 KiwiBuild house is affordable for first-home buyers?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: We've based that calculation on extensive advice from the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment about what first-home buyers would be able to borrow. But I would note that Ms Schultz the developer of apartments in Papakura that that member wanted us to include in KiwiBuild said that construction costs had pushed the price of her apartments up $75000. So on the one hand that member criticises us for increasing the maximum price of a three-bedroom KiwiBuild home in Auckland and on the other hand she criticises us for not increasing them further so that her friend can take part in KiwiBuild. That's bizarre.Hon Judith Collins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I take offence at that last comment from the member. That person is not a friend; I've met her once. The Minister has attacked my integrity.SPEAKER: The member has taken offence. I think it might even be simpler without having to rule on that to say that the comment was superfluous and should be withdrawn. Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I withdraw.Hon Judith Collins: Thank you Mr Speaker. How long has he known that his KiwiBuild houses are going to cost first-home buyers $50000 more than he told them eight months ago?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The decision to increase the price points was made several weeks ago.Hon Judith Collins: Why did it take him so long to realise that the $600000 KiwiBuild promise was out of date?Hon PHIL TWYFORD: It didn't take long at all but we've had a lot of expert advice from people including—Hon Judith Collins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think the Minister didn't hear me. I said "Why did it take him so long".SPEAKER: Well—Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I reject the member's assertion.SPEAKER: I don't think we've got a point of order any more."
3. Budget 2018—Fiscal ResponsibilityDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of FinanceBudget 2018—Fiscal Responsibility3. Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of Finance: Will the Government demonstrate fiscal responsibility in Budget 2018; if so how?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Yes we will show fiscal responsibility through a strong commitment to our Budget responsibility rules. I am pleased to be able to say that Budget 2018 will show that we are meeting all of these challenging targets. This means among other things that we will deliver sustainable operating surpluses and we will reduce net core Crown debt to 20 percent of GDP within five years of taking office. When we announce the Budget on Thursday New Zealanders will see that we have got the balance right between fiscal responsibility and implementing our plan to rebuild critical public services.Dr Deborah Russell: Why has fiscal responsibility been an important part of Budget 2018 considerations?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Because every Government has the responsibility to future generations to ensure we budget responsibly and have the means to make significant and sustained investments. We need to futureproof the economy to ensure that New Zealand is resilient to any shocks natural or global that we may face. Our economy must be fit for purpose for this generation and for our children and grandchildren.Dr Deborah Russell: How does this fiscal responsibility fit within the Government's wider policy agenda?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Our Budget responsibility rules underpin the Government's work programme. The Government knows that we need Budget surpluses and a growing economy to be able to fund our public services to the high standards that Kiwis expect and deserve. Budget 2018 will show that we have got the balance right between being responsible fiscal managers and also rebuilding critical public services like hospitals classrooms housing and police.Hon Simon Bridges: You just said all that.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: You didn't hear it though did you Mr Bridges? Budget 2018 also shows that this Government has a plan for a more productive sustainable and inclusive economy where the Government is a partner rather than waiting for wealth to trickle on down.
Upston Louise; Williams PotoHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Thank you Madam Chair. I do intend to take the maximum number of calls in this opportunity in Part 3. There were questions I specifically asked the Minister in Part 2 that there wasn't a reply to so I am hopeful that the Minister in the chair will answer specific questions in this part. She's shaking her head which isn't particularly encouraging. As I've said in the earlier parts of this debate there is no opportunity for scrutiny outside the Chamber for this particular piece of legislation and for the Supplementary Order Paper that the Minister has tabled so I do hope that the Minister takes this seriously as this is the only opportunity for scrutiny.What I wanted to raise was that in Part 3 of this legislation there are similar to Part 2 multiple subparts. I want to just ask about a couple of them. Subpart 1 in clause 91 is basically talking about what the obligations are and then what the responding sanctions are. We'll talk more about the sanctions in a later part of the debate but I'm interested specifically in Subpart 3 which is around beneficiaries' obligations. The part that I'm looking for that I'm surprised that the Minister hasn't included in this is around people with disabilities. I want to speak quite clearly about particularly those who have children with disabilities who have lifelong permanent disabilities and the obligation on an annual basis that they have to file paperwork and medical certificates to confirm that yes they are still permanently disabled. I would've thought that that would've been a simple change that the Minister could've taken on given her significant discussions around improving support for people with disabilities. So I've been looking to see the change that has been included in Part 3 around beneficiaries' obligations because that is an obligation that I would've thought for all of the Minister's words around improving the welfare system would've been the first on the list—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): I apologise to the honourable member. The time has come for me to report progress.Progress to be reported presently.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Families Commission Act Repeal Bill without amendment and progress on the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill.Report adopted.The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.
Bayly Andrew; Williams PotoANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. So first of all I'd just like to thank you for acknowledging me. I do confirm that I did seek the call and I was very loud I thought in calling for my amendment. So I just do want that noted if I may Madam Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): It has been noted. Now we are moving Part 3 which is the—Hon Tracey Martin: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Sorry Madam Chair. Just speaking to the point of order—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): I have ruled on the point of order.Hon Tracey Martin: I apologise. It's just that it happened in the last Parliament as well so it's not really a new situation for these current members.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): I've spoken on the point of order. Can we now turn to Part 3 the debate on clauses 90 through to 167.
Upston Louise; Williams PotoHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Just speaking further to the point of order Madam Chair. As you would appreciate this is a significant piece of legislation a large piece of legislation with multiple subparts in that part that we were debating. So we've had a situation where yes I'd taken an earlier call in the part and had said that I wished to speak later on my Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs). I didn't speak at all on either of the two SOPs so the committee has now voted on something the public don't have scrutiny on it and I wasn't afforded the opportunity to speak on the SOP that's now been voted on. Madam Chair I'm deeply concerned about that as a process of this Chamber. [Interruption] CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Just a moment. I can deal with this. We will take it one at a time thank you. We're just checking our notes. Hon Louise Upston you did have an opportunity to have a couple of calls; I've indicated at least two. The Clerk's just checking whether there may have been a third. Had you—Hon Louise Upston: I didn't speak on the SOPs.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): That is a matter entirely for the content of your call when you take the call at the time. That is entirely over to you. Look I apologise. We have voted on it and I have indicated to the member the debate had been running for well over two hours. There had been plenty of calls taken. We are now moving on to Part 3 which are Obligations"."
Upston LouiseHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I'm just interested in the procedures of the House. The normal understanding has been is if a member has a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) in their name that they are permitted to speak in the committee stage and there were a number of members who weren't given the opportunity to speak on their SOPs in that stage of the committee stage. I'm interested in terms of—is this a new procedure of the House that even if an SOP is in a member's name they won't be given the opportunity to contribute?CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Thank you very much. I thank the member for her intervention. I'm just quickly looking through my list. I understand that there was one member who had an SOP that didn't have an opportunity to speak. I'm not sure whether that member sought the call. I'm not sure that I saw the member seek the call and I apologise to that member for doing so. However the debate had been running for more than two hours—probably closer to two hours and 15. I do apologise to the member—I see that you are there. However we have now closed that debate and we are now moving on to Part 3. But I do take your point. I do acknowledge that that was an error on my part; however I didn't see the member seek the call.
O'Connor Greg; Williams PotoGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu): I move That the question be now put.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): The question is that the question be now put. Those of that opinion will say Aye—Barbara Kuriger: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): We are in the middle of a vote—[Interruption] No we are in the middle of a vote. Those of that opinion will say Aye; to the contrary No. The Ayes have it. [Interruption] A party vote is called for. The Clerk will conduct a party vote.
McAnulty KieranKIERAN McANULTY (Junior Whip—Labour): Sorry Madam Chair—did you call me?CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): I did call you yes.KIERAN McANULTY: I'm struggling to hear—is the microphone on? Anyway I move That the question be now put.
McAnulty Kieran; Rurawhe AdrianSOCIAL SECURITY LEGISLATION REWRITE BILLIn CommitteeKIERAN McANULTY (Junior Whip—Labour): I seek leave to debate the Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill as four themes as discussed by the Business Committee. CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Leave is sought for that purpose; is there any objection? There is objection.
Families Commission Act Repeal Bill — In Committee
Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill — Third Reading
van de Molen TimTIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise and take a somewhat more succinct call than the last member Willie Jackson on the Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill. Look I would just like to admire I suppose the last member's ability to take 10 minutes to say what he could have said in approximately 30 seconds. Having said that I will try to minimise my contribution and stick to some of the facts here. So look this is an important piece of legislation. We're really looking to just develop some appropriate regulations around the transacting of militarised equipment from New Zealanders. It's good to see actually that New Zealand First have decided to come to the party as it were and change their stance. I commend Ron Mark for that in particular moving away from his comments around the potential War Dogs Bill" as he previously called it. Perhaps he had plenty of opportunity to reconsider his stance while he was repurposing military aircraft to fly him around the country. So look as we saw through the committee stage of this we had Supplementary Order Paper 24 which brought in a few minor amendments there which was an appropriate reflection to get a few tweaks to tidy it up a little bit. But look the main one I wanted to focus on with my contribution was around the classification of dual-use goods and the exemption of that from this particular bill for people who are conducting brokering activities. Of course they require a permit under this bill but they can be exempt if they are transacting in dual-use goods. I'm talking here about navigation avionics-type equipment electronics lasers propulsion units—any of these sorts of things that could indeed have both a military purpose and also an agricultural purpose for example. Interestingly that can have quite a contrasting impact on the particular nation that those pieces of equipment then might be utilised in. It could be bringing significant benefit through agricultural purposes or causing significant harm through military purposes if used inappropriately.I think it's really important for us to have that exemption here in New Zealand because we are indeed world leaders in a number of areas. We have a significant electronics programme being developed and we can look at projects such as the autonomous kiwifruit harvester in the Bay of Plenty—Robotics Plus are doing some great work up in that space. So it would be inappropriate to capture them and restrict them from being able to trade some of those pieces of equipment that may potentially have a dual use. So this gives us the ability to exempt them provided they have made some effort to endeavour that their goods will not be used for any military-type purpose.So look I'll just wrap it up there. This bill has been well supported. It's important that we continue to take a strong leadership stance especially around the implementation of our Arms Trade Treaty and I think this makes an important contribution to that with appropriate exemptions and rules in place. Thank you."
Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm pleased to take what will be a much shorter call on this bill than I've made previously and I'd like to start by acknowledging as others have done various parties who have been involved in the drafting and now passage of this legislation: the officials who drafted and also those who advised the select committee; those who have submitted members of the public including NGOs as has already been acknowledged by another member who's spoken on the bill; and fellow members of the select committee. I wasn't part of the select committee from the very start in considering this bill so I am in the parlance of the navy something of a half-tripper in this regard but I did enjoy my time considering the bill. While the conversations were at times pedantic I suppose an unkind person might say these were important matters that we were thrashing out between us.Also I congratulate the Governments—plural—who have been involved in the passage of the bill. Of course my party's Government initially introduced it and the current Government continued it on to this stage. The structure of the bill is clear enough and needs no further explanation from me—essentially setting up a registration and permit regime.It's been noted by other members who have taken a call on this third and final reading that the bill is an important measure to help New Zealand meet its international obligations. There are two dimensions to that. One is the legal obligations that we have via the Arms Trade Treaty but also we have a moral obligation as a country not only to other nations but also to ourselves. The heart of the bill it seems to me—and an important mechanism within it—is the fact that it controls the activities of New Zealand citizens albeit they are not necessarily in New Zealand at the time that they are performing the conduct that's prohibited by the bill. So that's not unique to this legislation of course but it is quite an interesting characteristic and of course completely in keeping with the fact that it is a bill that seeks to regulate and control activity across the border.I will be interested to see as I'm sure other members of the House will be how the bill is applied—or the Act is applied as it will soon become—in future years. The devil is always in the detail in such matters and those of us who have paid close attention to its provisions will be interested to see exactly how it plays out in terms of those definitions in the application of it both here and overseas. So with no further ado it gives me pleasure to commend the bill—along with other members of my party and indeed it seems the whole House—for it to be passed into law at this third and final reading.
O'Connor Simon; Tolley AnneSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Thank you very much Madam Deputy Speaker. I am very pleased to take a call in this third reading on the Brokering (Weapons and Related Items) Controls Bill. Look it is an excellent bill. The reasons for it have been very clear and well-articulated by members earlier and I'd like to add my own voice and earlier presentations. Can I acknowledge all of the members of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee who worked on this in the robust debates as it's been referred to but I think it's probably a good example of how the Parliament works that everyone's come together. I particularly want to pay mention to the officials in the Parliamentary Counsel Office who worked very hard to pull this together on some elements that were particularly technical. I think too of their patience as we moved through the committee of the whole House but I'm sure they served the Minister well.Look this is a small piece of legislation for this House but an important one. Unlike the previous speaker Golriz Ghahraman I haven't lived in a war zone but I was lucky enough—if that's the right word—to be in Afghanistan and Iraq earlier this year and one can see the devastation wrought by weapons in general knowing full well that many of those are brokered into those theatres of conflict.But some might suggest after the committee of the whole House that I have said far too much and spent far too much time on this bill. So it's an absolute pleasure to commend this bill to the House.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The next call is a split call.
Points of Order — Leave to Take Through All Stages—Farm Debt Mediation Bill
Farm Debt Mediation Bill — Introduction
Brownlee GerryPOINTS OF ORDERLeave to Take Through All Stages—Farm Debt Mediation BillHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): I seek leave for the remaining stages of members' order of the day No. 1 the Farm Debt Mediation Bill to be taken as one question at the conclusion of the bill's first reading tomorrow.Hon Chris Hipkins: I couldn't hear that because there was interruption.SPEAKER: Could the member repeat it—essentially that it go through all stages tomorrow. Is there any objection to that? Yes there is.
Ball Darroch; Mallard TrevorFARM DEBT MEDIATION BILLIntroductionDARROCH BALL (NZ First): I seek leave to introduce the Farm Debt Mediation Bill a member's bill in my name and for it to be set down as members' order of the day No. 1.SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that? There appears to be none. It will be so set down.
Thursday 10 May 2018 - Volume 729
12. Consumer Credit—Practices and RegulationDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer AffairsConsumer Credit—Practices and Regulation12. Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What advice has he received since commissioning the targeted review of consumer credit regulation in December last year on the extent of consumer credit-related harm in New Zealand?Hon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): An analysis of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act has already found concerning evidence of predatory lending from unethical practices in debt collection and truck shops. Practices such as excessive interest rates fees and high-cost borrowing are trapping New Zealanders in debt spirals that are long term and have detrimental impacts. Consumer advocates are expressing strong concerns at the high cost of credit and inadequate assessments of the affordability of loans. People are being provided loans that they are not being able to pay back and are drawn into situations where the cost of the resulting debts is many times the original due to interest rates and penalty charges. I think most New Zealanders would be appalled at some of the practices of some lenders who tend to prey on the most vulnerable in our community.Dr Duncan Webb: Is the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act in its current form fit for purpose?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: No. In 2015 a number of changes were introduced to consumer credit legislation and while some lenders have improved disclosure and information I have spent time engaging with budget advisory groups citizens advice bureaus and NGOs across New Zealand who are saying that at the coalface they are seeing lenders continuing to prey on vulnerable consumers with predatory practices and unfair contracts. Such behaviour is creating debt spirals and significant financial stress and the Government is working on appropriate protections for consumers in the place of current legislation.Dr Duncan Webb: What action will the Government be taking to protect consumers from predatory lending practices?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I hope to see legislation introduced by the end of the year that will address predatory lending and some of the unethical practices I've spoken about. I want to see New Zealanders well-informed and equipped with the best tools to navigate all the financial decisions that come their way. In addition to reforms this Government is also committed to tackling many of the issues that contribute to financial stress lifting financial capability and building a strong and inclusive economy that delivers for all New Zealanders.
9. Social Services—Data Collection and Data UseGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu) to the Minister for Social DevelopmentSocial Services—Data Collection and Data Use9. GREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu) to the Minister for Social Development: What data-related announcements has she recently made?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): On Monday the Government announced that we will be undertaking broad consultation with the social sector seeking New Zealanders' views on social well-being and how to best promote and use people's personal information. From May to August the Social Investment Agency will be engaging with the social sector in 28 locations across the country. This initiative is the start of building a systematic approach to the way we work with data and wider evidence to improve how Government makes decisions and delivers services.Greg O'Connor: What else is being done to ensure improved practices around data use?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has developed a framework that it is putting into use that ensures privacy human rights and ethics are built into the way they develop new services. It is a set of smart tools that will help those designing services to pause right from the start and ask the vital question: just because we have the information is it right to use it?Greg O'Connor: Why is this work important?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Data and analytics have a valuable role to play in designing and delivering services that work for people. However they must be used responsibly and carefully. It's important that the public trusts how Government uses data and is part of ensuring the rules that govern it—a concept that the previous Government failed miserably to understand. As a Government we are taking tangible steps to build a culture of treating people with dignity and respect. This includes respecting people's privacy human rights and maintaining high ethical standards when it comes to their information. The fact that MSD's work has been welcomed and endorsed by the Privacy Commissioner speaks volumes.