edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Simpson Scott: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSimpson Scott: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11407. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): It is a pleasure to take a brief call in this third reading of this bill before the House to transition the emissions trading scheme (ETS) from the one-for-two model that we have had since 2009 to a phased change and through to a new and more sustainable objective for us as a nation and for our ETS system.This has been a really interesting debate. It has been very useful to hear opinions from across the House and to hear members expressing their views. Although I think it is fair to say that as a House we probably differ about the size of the step we all agree that this is a step in the right direction. On that basis I commend the bill to the House.
Bennett Paula: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBennett Paula: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11405. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Climate Change Issues): I move That the Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. First of all I want to thank the Government support parties—ACT United Future and the Māori Party—for their support of this bill. But I also want to recognise the rest of the House Labour New Zealand First and the Greens—that they are supporting this bill through the House and the removal of the one-for-two model.It is important that we pass this bill through all stages tonight so that there is business certainty and so that they can get on with it. There was some concern as to what it might do with the markets but actually I think that has all been fine.I want to just say that I do not think this is the answer to certainly climate change. I do not think this is the one thing that is going to make the biggest difference if you like. I think there are certainly more steps that we have got to take. We have got to be careful that we do them in a concerted way that is in the best interests of New Zealanders and New Zealand and that I think looks really longer term. Like most members of this House I care about the country that I will leave for my grandchildren’s children. I think quite a lot about the differences that we can be making now that will actually make a huge difference to them. Thank you to the House. Thank you to those businesses out there to the individuals who make a difference and to all of those who see the work that we do in protecting this planet as being important.
Borrows Chester: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11404. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Members James Shaw’s tabled amendment inserting new clause 4AA is out of order as it is outside the scope of the bill.The question was put that the following amendments in the name of James Shaw to clauses 4 5 and 8 be agreed to:replace clause 4 with:(4)Section 63A repealed (Modification of liability to surrender units to cover certain emissions);repeal section 63A;replace clause 5 with:(5)Section 64A repealed (Modification of entitlement to receive New Zealand units for removal activities);repeal section 64A;replace clause 8 with:(8)Section 84A repealed (Temporary suspension of allocation entitlement for eligible industrial activities) andrepeal section 84A.
Borrows Chester: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11400. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Oh here we go! I call Denis O’Rourke.
Clark David: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11400. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): I do want to speak briefly to the title and the amendment put forward by Mr James Shaw. The suggestion that we call it the “Climate Change Response (Removal of one Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill” is entirely accurate and emphasises the point that this is a timid first step by the Government on a journey to address climate change. As we have seen there seems to have been universal agreement breaking out around the Committee about the need to take some measures. We have got a strong disagreement about how much should be done and on this side of the Chamber of course we would like to see real and genuine progress but the suggestion that we change the name of the bill to be “Climate Change Response (Removal of one Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill” is something that we could support. We could insert words like “Merely” or “Not More Than” or a number of other phrases to emphasise the point but that would certainly be a more accurate way of stating it. So in that vein I would like to support that very sensible suggestion put forward by Mr Shaw. Thank you.Hon Members: Mr Chair.
Clark David: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11394. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): On a not completely dissimilar note—and I shall be very short in my contribution; I can see my colleagues looking at me wanting to make sure that I am indeed adding something substantive to the debate—as my colleague Su’a William Sio has pointed out there has not been a select committee process. I am interested in knowing—clauses 4 5 6 and 7 all refer to the date of 1 January 2019. That date is I suspect something that has been consulted on in the emissions trading scheme review. I am wanting to know what business has said about that date and the particular transition that is on offer. Obviously we have not had a full select committee process so we have not had feedback from business on the concrete proposal at the end as best I know but Minister Paula Bennett may have consulted in some capacity or may have had a separate process previously. I am interested to know the process and what the feedback was as to how this measure this timing was received by business as compared with other timings on offer—which could have been anything—and other transitional measures. We have got only one in this bill and that point has been made many times but how was this transitional measure and this timing received as opposed to others?
Sio William: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSio William: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11394. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Su’a WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Māngere): I do not intend to take a long call. I just have a couple of questions that I would like to ask Minister Bennett and I hope that she can answer them. Clause 6 makes reference to “an eligible industrial activity”. I am just asking what the definition is for that term because in the principal Act there is not one. What is the meaning of “an eligible industrial activity”? My concern there is whether it is anything to do with burning coal or anything to do with diesel-generated activities. That is the first question.The second question relates to the regulatory impact statement. It makes reference to a number of organisations that the department consulted but it does not name those organisations individually. It just lumps them all together. I am interested to know whether the Minister would be prepared to reveal who the market intermediaries would be and who the individuals are in the non-governmental organisations and community groups concerned.I want to get a sense as to who was consulted by the organisation. Like I said there are no individual names from the organisation and because we have not been able to forward this to a select committee I am interested in whether the Minister would be able to make that information available. If she cannot tonight then she might like to table it before the final reading.
Clark David: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11393. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): I rise to speak to the amendment that has been put forward by Dr Kennedy Graham. I think it is a thoroughly sensible amendment and it brings the legislation into line with the need to start a process of carbon budgeting—of actually working towards our climate change goals. It specifies very clearly that that is where we intend to move and currently the Government does not have that explicit link in its own legislation. So this seems like a very sensible way forward and I want to thank Dr Graham for proposing the amendment. I think it is very helpful Dr Graham. It is very helpful to this Committee.Of course we on this side of the Chamber have long advocated for an independent climate commission that would establish such a carbon budgeting process which would shift us on to a path to achieving significant emissions reductions which is what we all agree needs to happen. The rhetoric on that side of the Chamber is about achieving emissions reduction targets but there is no plan. There is no way to get there. There is no intention expressed in the legislation to have a budgeting process or to actually align the spoken intention with any action whatsoever. So that is why I think Dr Graham has done us all a service in putting that down in very simple terms that the Government I hope can agree with because if the Government really is wanting to prove that it is true to its word then it will have no objection to this amendment. I cannot see how it could object to this amendment that Dr Kennedy Graham has put forward if it is true to its word.Dr Megan Woods: If they mean to meet it.Dr DAVID CLARK: If it means to meet the targets it will sign up to this amendment. So I am very interested to see whether the Minister for Climate Change Issues rises to her feet seizing the moment of opportunity to speak in favour of this simple amendment because then she would be saying that what the Government has said is credible and it understands that this is a way of getting there and of course the amendment leaves it the discretion to set out the carbon budgets and the targets itself. It leaves the Government the freedom of course to do that in the way it sees as being most meaningful but it says: “Actually we intend to back our words with some actions.” So that is why I wish to speak in favour of Dr Graham’s amendment.
Woods Megan: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWoods Megan: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11392. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): A new point of order Megan Woods?Dr MEGAN WOODS: It is seeking your clarification Mr Chairperson. Regarding the point the Minister made around that she is quite correct when she says that New Zealand does not have a nationally determined contribution at this stage until the Paris agreement is ratified by New Zealand. If that amendment was changed to an intended nationally determined contribution would that make a difference?The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I thank the member for her contribution and I will go back to my original point and that is that it is not the responsibility of the Chair to sort out the scope of a bill—to extend the scope of the bill—to make it effective. This amendment even with its circular explanation is outside the scope of the bill and if the Government wants to sort it out that is something that it will have to do and we cannot do it by moving an out-of-scope amendment from the floor.
Bennett Paula: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBennett Paula: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11392. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Climate Change Issues): If I am reading the amendment correctly then what the member is proposing is that it actually align with New Zealand’s nationally determined contribution. As the member would know we took an intended nationally determined contribution to Paris and that is still an intended nationally determined contribution until that is ratified and it has not been ratified and as a consequence of that we do not actually have a nationally determined contribution as per the Paris agreement yet.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): What I am going to do is reiterate my ruling. If the Government becomes convinced that the scope of the bill needs to be widened by the inclusion of a clause such as this I am sure the Government will bring it back and seek the leave of the House to extend the scope of the bill or if it is possible for it to amend it. I have ruled it out on the basis of the advice that I have received from my right and left—although of course it is my decision—and if that as the member says renders the bill ineffectual then that is a problem that the Minister will have to sort out.
Mallard Trevor: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11392. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I can hear what the Minister said. I am told by someone beside me that she would like to say something.
Shaw James: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11391. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Recognising that it may be unusual the original 2002 Act does not actually state in its purpose that we need to reduce our emissions in line with commitments because it predates our commitments. So the purpose of this amendment would be to amend the original Act because otherwise it would not give any effect to this bill. The purpose of this bill as stated in the preamble to this bill is to give effect to our commitment but the 2002 Act gives no effect to our commitment so we actually need to change the 2002 Act in order to give effect to this bill which is why we have put this amendment into place. I recognise that is kind of circular but the problem is that the current bill before the Committee would not actually have any force because the original 2002 Act is for a business-as-usual scenario not a reduction in our emissions by 11 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030 which is the Government’s commitment. Is that clear?
Mallard Trevor: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11390. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Is there any objection to that process? There appears to be none.
Ross Jami-Lee: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11390. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for all questions in this debate to be taken as one debate and voted on separately.
Korako Nuk: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKorako Nuk: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11390. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]NUK KORAKO (National): Kia ora e Te Mana Whakawā e mihi atu ana ki a koe. It is my pleasure to be the final speaker on this bill. I have two very important points to finish off on. The first thing is that the bill does reflect the Government’s commitment to a low-carbon economy. The other one is that this also is a piece of legislation that is very grounded and if I dare say very pragmatic that shows the Government will not sacrifice our economy it will not sacrifice our businesses it will not sacrifice our people and economy on the altar of environmentalism. So on that note I would dearly commend this bill to the House. Kia ora.Bill read a second time.
Doocey Matt: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDoocey Matt: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11388. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): Can I start where that last speaker Dr David Clark left off. I would like to congratulate all the parties in the House on getting behind this bill. At the end of the day we are aiming to move forward to get a target of reducing emissions to 30 percent under the 2005 level by 2030. If there is going to be a Minister who will do that in this House it is the Hon Paula Bennett who is driving this agenda forward.Picking up the themes around working in a globalised world I think we need to think about that and the role that we play in a globalised world. New Zealand has a significant part to play. I think we take our obligations about reducing climate change very seriously. We know that the Government has done a lot of work. This is just one tool in that work about uncoupling emissions to GDP growth. We know that since 1990 the GDP emission unit has reduced by 34 percent. So we have done some work—hey nothing is perfect—but we are moving forward. I commend this bill to the House.
Clark David: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11388. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): I want to share the sentiment that Dr Kennedy Graham has brought to this conversation. We know this measure is nothing but window dressing on behalf of the Government and we would push them to go a little further. We are supporting the bill—Ian McKelvie: Stop reading your notes.Dr DAVID CLARK: —because we think that—thank you for your advice. We support the bill because we support some baby steps towards a future where emissions reductions are a real part of it and where we can shift our economy towards a low-carbon economy that has real opportunity for New Zealanders.The regulatory impact statement which sadly is about all we have got in terms of submissions because we have skipped the stages that we would normally have in the debate tell us the direct cost is worth about 8 hours of GDP. That is pathetic as a signal. The opportunity on the other side of this is what is being lost. There is an opportunity. Grant Robertson raised the issue of re-educating those in Huntly to give them the opportunity of new skills development. That is what we would like to see on this side of the House.We believe that there is a real upside to the climate change downside where if New Zealand gets involved in developing new intellectual property and is on the upside of the technology we can seize an opportunity and raise living standards for New Zealanders instead of managing decline in a world that is facing catastrophic climate change.
Foster-Bell Paul: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11386. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): That was a very tiring contribution from that member Denis O’Rourke who seems to have only two settings in any debate. Every bill that is put up before this House according to that member either is pathetic and window dressing or is the end of the world as we know it. It is just a great tragedy that he is not capable of taking a more sophisticated and nuanced approach to what I think is very balanced reasonable and pragmatic legislation that has been put up by this—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The member will resume his seat. I think we have now reached the point of relevance and repetition. I have warned members before that reading out the same set of notes is not allowed in the House and the member is I think the fourth person to do that.PAUL FOSTER-BELL: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): You are not going to argue with me Mr Foster-Bell are you?PAUL FOSTER-BELL: I am not going to argue with you Mr Assistant Speaker but I just wanted to point out I suppose that I was engaging in a response to points raised by the previous speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Well I was pointing out to the member—and I think he is aware—that he was repeating the words that had been used by three other people in this debate and in fact I think he was actually reading them as well if he—[Interruption] Well maybe he has got them memorised.PAUL FOSTER-BELL: Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I am not actually reading from my notes at all; I have them here for convenient reference.But in any case this is a Government that is focused on protecting the environment—something that the previous Labour Government seemed to give very very little interest to. We have an excellent Minister for Climate Change Issues. This measure will cost New Zealand households—low to moderate income households—around about $30 to $40 per year. If the member wants more sweeping measures that are not window dressing in his words what sort of cost is he wanting to impose on New Zealand households? Would $300 or $400 a year or $3000 or $4000 a year—in Mr O’Rourke’s world—be sufficient to implement the sweeping and significant measures that he seems to want as opposed to what I think are utterly timely and very appropriate measures from this Government which has put considerable effort into retaining a position that is well-balanced?I commend the bill to the House.
Mallard Trevor: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11382. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): James Shaw—I am hoping he has a different set of notes.
Dowie Sarah: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11382. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): As a balanced pragmatic sensible and reasonable MP and one who represents Invercargill and parts of Southland I am very pleased to take this call in support of the Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill. I say again that this is a balanced pragmatic bill which looks to phase out in a staged way the one-to-two subsidy. The bill phases out the subsidy in the emissions trading scheme that allows some businesses to pay one emission unit for every two tonnes of pollution they emit and that is over a 3-year period.If I come back to Southland and what Southlanders believe we are a primary industry - driven economy and we are an export-driven economy. We have a lot of manufacturing in our region. Our region is one that is doing well: it is holding its own and it is one that is creating jobs for our people. In fact we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in New Zealand.My businesses in Southland are going to be very pleased about the staged process of redaction of the one-to-two scheme in this bill in the way that it is set out. It is a measured bill. It is a measured process of reducing this measure to make it sustainable for businesses to build that into their processes so that the money spent is not too onerous. As such I again say that this is a balanced and pragmatic bill and I commend this bill to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11376. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! We are going to have a vote and it will be done in silence.Bill read a first time.
Doocey Matt: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDoocey Matt: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11375. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): It is an honour and a pleasure to rise in support of the Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill. Can I first just acknowledge my colleagues on this side of the House for their debate contributions so far. I think it has been a very balanced debate. I think they have taken small steps and if I had been able to bring in a polaroid camera I would have photographed them.Can I just pick up on some comments from my Green Party colleagues who said we were repeating lines to appease our voters. I think what is more important is when their colleagues their friends over in the UK the Green Party of England and Wales decided that our lamb had a bigger carbon footprint than UK lamb so it spread out its propaganda and said our lamb did not have a smaller contribution—James Shaw: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think that if one member is not allowed to refer to islands in the Pacific another cannot refer to an island in the North Atlantic.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I thank the member for his comments. The point I made earlier was that there was quite a long dialogue on the Pacific Islands and I did bring the member back to that and we have dealt with that matter. Now I am listening closely to what this member is saying and if he goes on and spends all his time on that I will be on my feet again. To mention a country in passing is fine. Other than that I will move on it.MATT DOOCEY: I commend this bill to the House. [Interruption]
Hayes Joanne: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11372. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): I just want to disagree with that member’s point that this Government does not believe in climate change. Of course we do—that is why we are in here today. We are taking a pragmatic a sensible and a responsible approach to climate change. It is a balanced view. I know that there are people in this House who do not like those four words. They do not understand that if we went out and put in a very harsh process to the phasing out of and eliminating the one-to-two obligation then we would wipe out a lot of businesses and it would not be very good for the economy would it? No it would not be.When we start looking at the dairy farmers if we went in and took a hard approach to them they would be paying and paying and paying. So far we have not heard from anyone on the Opposition benches about the value that the dairy industry adds to the economy of this country. As we start going through if we look at the phased approach in the first year we are looking at 67 percent by 1 January 2017 and then 83 percent by 1 January 2018 with all sectors paying full price for the emissions trading scheme by 1 January 2019.As I say—and I am going to keep driving this home—this policy our view to climate change response is a pragmatic sensible responsible and balanced approach and I have no problems in commending the bill to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11371. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Dr Kennedy Graham—5 minutes.
Foster-Bell Paul: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11370. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): E Te Mana Whakawā Tuarua tēnā koe. Tēnā koutou katoa e ngā mema o Te Whare. It is a pleasure to follow on from Denis O’Rourke who has just resumed his seat. I was surprised that he brought such a level of modernity to the debate given that he generally adheres to Victorian views on most of the subjects he intervenes on in this House.This Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill is a very good one and I would like to congratulate my colleague the Hon Paula Bennett the Minister for Climate Change Issues who has introduced this piece of I think positive legislation.We take the environment and our commitment to it very seriously on this side of the House. It is a blue-green approach and it represents I think a very sensible balancing act in that we are not immediately launching with the full force taking effect; we are in fact phasing in a reduction in the two-for-the-price-of-one that currently exists for carbon units in certain industries. We are phasing that in over a 3-year period at a rate of 67 percent next year 83 percent in 2018 and 100 percent in 3 years’ time.I would point out that agriculture is still not included in the emissions trading scheme but there will be a few costs from this measure for those who are participating in our vital agricultural economy. For instance although dairy farmers will not be paying for emissions from their animals Fonterra does have some emissions related to the coal-fired drying units for instance the electricity consumed in its plants for producing the dairy products—which are such valuable export commodities—and also for transport and trucking. So we have some estimates here for the costs that might be imposed of around $265 a year in 2017 for sheep and beef farmers going out to $795 and perhaps a little more for dairy farmers with $690 in 2017. But I think this is a relatively small price to pay for something that will cement New Zealand’s clean and green reputation on the world stage and allow us to continue to be a powerhouse in tourism to attract those high-value tourists who really do value a clean and green environment which is what we have to offer here.I welcome the support from parties opposite who will be supporting this bill through and I commend it fully to the House.
Dowie Sarah: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11366. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): I rise to take a short call on this Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill. I would like to follow on from my colleague Mr Scott Simpson who is the chairman of the Local Government and Environment Committee when he referred to this piece of legislation and this wonderful Budget recently delivered by the Hon Bill English as “pragmatic”. I would like to add a word to that that word being “balanced”. I think that this is a very balanced piece of legislation. It is a balanced way to move the emissions trading scheme (ETS) forward and to meet our international obligations without shirking our duties to our own people.What I want to say is that the members opposite seem to fail to remember that this scheme was brought into play—the one-for-two scheme—because of the global financial crisis. The reason that we brought it in was we wanted to support our people and we wanted to make sure that they had jobs during that time and could generate money for their families to support them. So this was a very pragmatic approach. It was a very balanced approach to allow businesses to move to meeting their obligations in respect of the ETS but not to be militant in a scheme that would mean that people would lose their jobs. At the end of the day this is now a balanced way of phasing out the one-for-two scheme that allows businesses to move themselves forward to meet their obligations over that 3-year period. I think that that is a positive way forward because this is about protecting the environment acknowledging climate change and moving us forward in respect of our international obligations given that we are an Island nation with a very large coastline but we do need to remember our people.If you look across what this Government is doing we are being balanced. We are a Government that cares about people. We care about our people having jobs being productive members of society and having money to spend on their families. If you were to be militant with an ETS jobs would just not be on the table. We would not be providing all of these jobs for our people out there in our sectors with the growth in tourism with the growth in manufacturing and with the growth in agriculture. We simply would not have that. Look this is a pragmatic approach to phasing the one-for-two scheme out but businesses have time to adjust. I think that is a balanced way forward and I support this bill.
Carter David: UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgency[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11359. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I accept the point that the member has made. It is a very valid point and will look into the matter as I soon as I leave the Chair.
Dunne Peter: UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDunne Peter: Urgency[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11358. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Internal Affairs): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I note that during the taking of that vote—so before the vote was completed and declared—the Parliament Today site was actually tweeting that urgency had already been granted for the passage of those particular pieces of legislation. I know this issue about the use of social media has been raised beforehand but it seems to me to be quite inappropriate for a website with some association with Parliament to be tweeting in advance about the outcome of a vote. I wonder whether your office could look into what happened and perhaps give some advice to the House in due course.
Brownlee Gerry: UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Urgency[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11358. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I move That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill and the introduction and passing of the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill. These are two bills that arise out of Budget decisions announced in the Budget statement read by the Minister of Finance earlier today. They deserve the urgent attention of the House because they have lead-in times that mean that those who are most affected will have plenty of warning about the provisions they are going to need to make whether that is providing for some costs that might arise out of the one-for-two decision or budgeting to facilitate a higher price for their tobacco products in their weekly budget. We hope that over this time it may in fact send a signal to many of those smokers that cessation would be a good idea so giving as long a period as possible before the next 10 percent increaseis a good idea wethink. Those are bills that the Government considers deserve the urgent attention of the House as I have moved.
Brownlee Gerry: Budget Statement — Budget DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Budget Statement — Budget Debate[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11358. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I move That this debate be now adjourned.
English Bill: Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill — Procedure First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeEnglish Bill: Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill — Procedure First Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): I move That the Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill be now read a first time.Bill read a first time.
Carter David: Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill — Procedure First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill — Procedure First Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Those papers are published under the authority of the House.
English Bill: Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill — Procedure First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeEnglish Bill: Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill — Procedure First Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): I hereby present the 2016 Budget Speech the Budget at a Glance the Fiscal Strategy Report (B.2) the Budget Economic and Fiscal Update (B.3) the Summary of Budget Initiatives (B.19) and the Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand for the year ending 30 June 2017 (B.5 Volumes 1-10).
Carter David: Appropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — ProcedureText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Appropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Procedure[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: That paper is published under the authority of the House.
English Bill: Appropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — ProcedureText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeEnglish Bill: Appropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Procedure[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): I hereby present the Supplementary Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand for the year ending 30 June 2016 (B.7).
UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUrgency[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11358. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]UrgencyHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I move That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill and the introduction and passing of the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill. These are two bills that arise out of Budget decisions announced in the Budget statement read by the Minister of Finance earlier today. They deserve the urgent attention of the House because they have lead-in times that mean that those who are most affected will have plenty of warning about the provisions they are going to need to make whether that is providing for some costs that might arise out of the one-for-two decision or budgeting to facilitate a higher price for their tobacco products in their weekly budget. We hope that over this time it may in fact send a signal to many of those smokers that cessation would be a good idea so giving as long a period as possible before the next 10 percent increaseis a good idea wethink. Those are bills that the Government considers deserve the urgent attention of the House as I have moved.A party vote was called for on the question That urgency be accorded.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Motion agreed to.Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Internal Affairs): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I note that during the taking of that vote—so before the vote was completed and declared—the Parliament Today site was actually tweeting that urgency had already been granted for the passage of those particular pieces of legislation. I know this issue about the use of social media has been raised beforehand but it seems to me to be quite inappropriate for a website with some association with Parliament to be tweeting in advance about the outcome of a vote. I wonder whether your office could look into what happened and perhaps give some advice to the House in due course.Mr SPEAKER: I accept the point that the member has made. It is a very valid point and will look into the matter as I soon as I leave the Chair.
Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill — Procedure First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAppropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill — Procedure First Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) BillProcedureHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): I hereby present the 2016 Budget Speech the Budget at a Glance the Fiscal Strategy Report (B.2) the Budget Economic and Fiscal Update (B.3) the Summary of Budget Initiatives (B.19) and the Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand for the year ending 30 June 2017 (B.5 Volumes 1-10).Mr SPEAKER: Those papers are published under the authority of the House.First ReadingHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): I move That the Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill be now read a first time.Bill read a first time.
Appropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — ProcedureText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAppropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Procedure[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 26 May 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Appropriation (2015/16 Supplementary Estimates) BillProcedureHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): I hereby present the Supplementary Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand for the year ending 30 June 2016 (B.7).Mr SPEAKER: That paper is published under the authority of the House.
Tuesday 5 July 2016 - Volume 715
Social Security (Extension of Young Persons Services and Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Social Security (Extension of Young Persons Services and Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 60New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Bill read a third time.Sitting suspended from 6.01 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.