edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Bennett Glen; Dean JacquiGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth): Kia ora Madam Speaker. Thank you for letting me take a call on the Civil Aviation Bill and I'm just glad that we can get on with it and get the work done. The workhorse the engine room which is the select committee space is where we want to get it on to and get on with the work rather than dilly-dallying chitter-chattering away in the House around this. We are committed to delivering and to making sure that our civil aviation and airways are safe and as my colleague Barbara Edmonds who's just sat down said these are laws from the 1960s and laws from the early 1990s. We need to be fit for a modern society. We need to be fit for the future. Coming from Taranaki we've just opened the new airport last year which sees almost half a million passengers through. Back when the original airport was opened in the 1960s there were less than 60000. So a lot's changed and obviously we need to ensure that our airways are safe. So I commend the Civil Avialil—the Civil Aviation Bill to the House. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): A technical term? Glen Bennett: Yeah. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you.
Edmonds BarbaraBARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a privilege to be able to rise to have a short call on the Civil Aviation Bill. Contrary to the comments from other side of the House something has been done about this bill since the previous term. There was an exposure draft in 2019 and there were numerous consultation papers during the previous term of Government. I acknowledge that this review did start in 2016; however we've taken it forward. It updates the Civil Aviation Act which is from the 1990s and the Airport Authorities Act which is from 1966. It is always good to refresh the legislation. I'm looking forward to seeing the submissions on the bill. It will be scrutinised heavily at the Transport and Infrastructure Committee and I commend this bill to the House.
Strange Jamie; Dean JacquiJAMIE STRANGE (Labour—Hamilton East): Madam Speaker thank you for the opportunity to take a brief call on the Civil Aviation Bill at first reading. As we've heard from previous speakers New Zealand is very much dependent on a reliable aviation system. We are fairly sparsely populated in some areas and we're a long thin country. We do by and large have an excellent aviation system and we saw that during COVID: the aviation sector really came to the fore in terms of supporting our country.One aspect I'm really interested in hearing teased out a little bit at the select committee is the aspect around autonomous vehicles and I mean vehicles like drones for example. You know there is certainly potential for future use in this area in terms of beyond the line-of-sight use of drones whether it's for delivering medicines to rural areas whether it's for delivering things like pizzas to people. But certainly there's lots of potential in this area and I will take a particular interest in that aspect as this bill goes through—just to sort of see what opportunities there may be in the future for this area. I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Tim van de Molen—five minutes.
Eagle PaulPAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai): Thank you Madam Speaker and I'm hopeful that the constructive feedback was the intention of that member's question. I certainly just want to add my weight to commending the first reading of the Civil Aviation Bill. Can I acknowledge the Transport and Infrastructure Committee—all members including the chair here—and we're looking forward to working through this. One of the compliments I want to pay that committee—which I am a member of dare I say it—is the robustness of the process from the officials. It's been questioned. I know these stakeholders well. I have two airports in my area and I talk to the Airports Association and associated businesses that come with such work as this. There are some key points that have not been mentioned. One of those is the intention of this bill to reduce the emissions in international aviation and really our obligations to do that. That's something that hasn't been mentioned but that is a goal of this Government across all transport modes. We've talked about drones—which has been covered I think by previous speakers on this side in particular—and some of those concerns about better cooperation agreements between airport authorities. This is a good piece of work. I am happy to hear the words that we are working constructively on the other side of the House. I'm sure that this will get full approval. I commend this bill to the House.
Bennett David; Dean JacquiHon DAVID BENNETT (National): Point of order Madam Speaker. Thank you Madam Speaker. When a Minister introduces a bill they have a very specific set of lines they have to read out to be a legitimate introduction of a bill. This did not happen in this case. I would like your guidance as to whether that requirement has been satisfied because—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): OK thank you. Thank you. I was not in the Chamber at the time of the referral of the bill. However I am advised that the referral motion was ultimately presented correctly—Hon Member: Ha ha!ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Well I'll tell you what I'll do. I wasn't in the Chamber. I will refer to the Clerk—bear with. Right so I am advised that what I said stands. The referral motion requires the Minister to nominate the select committee to which the bill is referred and I am told that that is what he did.Hon DAVID BENNETT (National): Point of order Madam Speaker. Thank you. That did occur after being prompted by the Speaker and we as ex-Ministers know that that is not a legitimate way of processing that application—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you—Hon DAVID BENNETT: —and that it has to be done by—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you; the member will resume his seat. I have ruled I have taken advice. The referral motion was ultimately done correctly.
O'Connor GregGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu): The irony of that member decrying Wellington intervention when not long ago he was demanding the Government virtually nationalise a dairy company which was about to be taken over by an overseas company so it's an irony-free zone for that particular member. But—Hon David Bennett: Point of order. The member's making an accusation which is simply not accurate. Would he like to explain further so that we can discuss that and—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you. The member will resume his seat.Hon David Bennett: —see what's actually happening. I never said about nationalising anything. That's a Labour Government approach.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The member will resume his seat.GREG O'CONNOR: As the chair of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee which will be considering this bill I'm very much looking forward to having it—a bill that is very much a moderniser. And I just look at the changes that have taken place in the aviation industry in the time since it was last modernised. We've had the sale of many of our airports in New Zealand but one of the big things we'll be looking at here is drones and the lack of real good legislation to control that. They are the factors that are going to be considered in this bill. Of course national security checks; again 9/11 has occurred since then so again it's about making sure that the necessary security that has arisen and concerns around that are incorporated. Drug and alcohol management will be considered and emissions and it just ensures—perhaps to the concerns of the previous speaker—that there is a just culture that ensures that safety is balanced with ability to self-report.So I'm looking forward to being the chair of the select committee which will consider this bill and I commend it to the House.
McAnulty KieranKIERAN McANULTY (Labour—Wairarapa): I can assure you sir that this side of the House does understand that. That is why we have raised the minimum wage. That is why we have improved workers' conditions because we understand the benefits of work. That side of the House doesn't have a monopoly on understanding that but here's a few facts for them—here's a few facts for them that they have omitted in the debate for this bill which all it does is it removes a provision that doesn't work. That's a fact: it just removes a provision that doesn't work.But here's a few facts. The last Labour Government before they were in had a lower unemployment rate than National ever achieved. This Government has a lower unemployment rate before and after lockdown than National ever achieved. So they can throw around all the numbers they like but it's the investment in programmes like free apprenticeships and it's the investment in programmes about skills training and the support schemes around getting into decent work with good conditions and good pay—that's what makes the difference.But here's another fact: every single speaker on that side of the House has mentioned Paula Bennett. Paula Bennett got a degree benefiting from the training incentive allowance. When she was the social development Minister she took that allowance away from beneficiaries—Hon Member: Pulled the ladder up.KIERAN McANULTY: Pulled the ladder up behind her. I will not be thanking Paula Bennett but I will be thanking the Hon Carmel Sepuloni for bringing that allowance back and giving hope to people. They don't need these sorts of measures.SPEAKER: Order! Order! Order! I reminded members on the other side of the House to stick to the bill. This member will too.KIERAN McANULTY: Fair enough I was going to wrap up anyway. I commend the bill to the House.
Sharma GauravDr GAURAV SHARMA (Labour—Hamilton West): Thank you Mr Speaker. It is a pleasure of mine today to speak in the House on the Social Security (Subsequent Child Policy Removal) Amendment Bill. I know that Minister Carmel Sepuloni is watching this on TV and I just want to say to her—SPEAKER: Order! The member cannot refer to people watching this on TV—Dr GAURAV SHARMA: My apologies.SPEAKER: —or in the gallery or anything like that.Dr GAURAV SHARMA: I just want to congratulate the Minister for bringing this bill to the House. It is one of many in a range of reforms that the Government is undertaking in helping fix the issues that were created by the last National Government. This bill fixes a lot of issues but it corrects some of the intergenerational issues that arise from parents not being able to take care of their children because of a hole in the system that was created by National. This bill is a step towards ensuring that the future generation is taken care of at an early age so that when they grow up we can avoid a lot of the social challenges people do face at that point. So I would highly recommend this bill to the House and I look forward to it being passed.
Luxton JoJO LUXTON (Labour—Rangitata): Thank you Mr Speaker. I stand and rise with great pride to support this piece of legislation and I do so as a member of Parliament who has real firsthand lived experience as a sole parent on a benefit who had to rely on food banks etc. to help feed my family. The rhetoric and reckons that have come from the Opposition this morning that sole parents are perhaps uneducated and unmotivated is quite frankly revolting. There is no evidence that this piece of legislation will create dependency. There is only evidence that the previous policy has not worked. I commend Minister Sepuloni for overturning what was a punitive discriminatory and quite frankly disgraceful piece of legislation brought into this House by that party opposite—the National Party. Shame on them.
Craig LizDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's an absolute pleasure to stand in support of this bill and in doing so I'd like to acknowledge Minister Carmel Sepuloni for the work she's done in bringing this bill to the House. This is a great moment to see this bill get to third reading. While I didn't sit on the select committee that heard the submissions I am very happy to support the bill because of the impact that it's going to have on children's lives because if we're removing subsequent child policy what it means is that with respect to their parents' work obligations children will be treated equally in the welfare system irrespective of whether they're a first or subsequent child. What that does is it means that parents have that choice returned to them in their children's early years about whether it is that they spend some time with their children in that crucial period of their children's development or whether it's their own choice to go out into the workforce to earn income for their family. So it's really really important that that is being restored.I just want to look back and as a Government we have increased benefits we have put the Best Start payment in for newborn babies we have indexed benefits to the average wage and so getting rid of ineffective and inefficient sanctions is a really important next step in making sure that our welfare system is fairer. So I'm very happy to commend this bill to the House.
Henderson EmilyDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Xiexie e te Māngai o te Whare. I rise to speak very briefly. I find it very difficult to hear the comments from across the House. Maureen Pugh the speaker opposite has just commented that the point of the law that they introduced just under 10 years ago was to reduce long-term benefit dependency. Well if it had done that we wouldn't need to remove it. There is absolutely not a skerrick of empirical evidence that this law does anything other than put women and children under intense stress and we heard that from all of the experts who came to see us. I am very proud to commend this bill to the House and I do it in the name of Jenny Kirk the Birkenhead MP from the late 1980s who died this morning. Moe mai rā Jenny. You were a great advocate for women and for children. Jenny was a solo mother when she campaigned in Birkenhead. She told me how she wore the same shirt every day because it was the only good one had. She knew about the struggles of women and children. She knew that that law was an appalling one and we have done the right thing. I commend this bill to the House.
Bennett GlenGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth): Kia ora Mr Speaker. Thank you. I rise to speak against failed policy and to say thank you to the Hon Carmel Sepuloni for ensuring that policy is right for her passion for her drive and for her commitment to ensure that our welfare system is affirming of all people offering a hand up offering options for the future. That's why this bill is so important. Currently the policy is discriminatory based on judgmental and stigmatising attitudes towards predominantly solo mums. Currently the policy is disproportionate. It impacts Māori by 56 percent. It impacts women by 86 percent. We on this side of the House believe in solo mothers. We believe in their potential. We want to support their aspirations so that solo mums and their whānau can get ahead. We're about investing in our solo parents: supporting upskilling training. That's why we've reinstated the training incentive allowance enabling—enabling—not punishing solo parents who have children. I want to thank the Hon Carmel Sepuloni for your drive to overhaul the welfare system and I commit and commend this bill to the House.
Strange JamieJAMIE STRANGE (Labour—Hamilton East): Thank you Mr Speaker. I commend this bill to the House.
Omer IbrahimIBRAHIM OMER (Labour): Salaam alaikum Mr Speaker. It's an absolute pleasure to take a call on the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Bill at third reading. As we prepare to pass this bill today I too wanted to pay my tribute and my aroha to the victims of the LynnMall terrorist attack in September earlier this month and also to the victims of 15 March 2019 and also to the victims of global terrorism who have been victims of evil attacks all over the world.Today is a good day. By the time we pass this bill New Zealanders across the country will be reassured and they will be feeling safe. While this bill alone won't stop future attacks combined with other measures it will do the job and it will keep us safe.I'd like to comment on the members of the ACT Party who said that this bill will never stop the attacks alone. This bill was not designed to stop attacks itself but combined with other measures it will because it simply provides our law enforcement agencies with a clear and legal authority to prevent and disrupt terrorism-related activities by creating new offences to criminalise terrorist activities. This is major and it does this by extending the control order regimes. It's a clear message to those who dare to want to hurt us to unleash attacks on our country. Terrorism has changed its face it has changed the way it operates; organised terror groups are not the only threats any more. Lone wolves pose the biggest threat today so our laws have to reflect this.The two terrorist attacks committed in our land—by doing so they tried to change the way that we live our lives. They wanted to take away our sense of safety. They tried to shake our trust in our law enforcement agencies. They tried to impose ideology that's not welcome in our country but we stood firm. We refused to be intimidated. We rejected the notion of being divided as a nation as they wanted us to be. That doesn't mean that we should be complacent and relaxed. We've got work to do. We need to consolidate our laws give our law enforcement tools to protect us to do their job and that's exactly what we're doing today.I was so proud of the way that our country responded to all the attacks but I'm also proud today as we prepare to pass this bill—I'm again proud. This bill was carefully considered and the policy in the bill was developed through a comprehensive process to make sure it doesn't compromise rights recognised in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. I'd like to thank the Justice Committee for the good work that they have done considering this bill. I'd like to thank the submitters. I'd like to thank all the staff that worked hard on this. I'd also like to thank the National Party for their positive contribution especially the Hon Simon Bridges and his positive remarks last night. Lastly I'd like to thank the Minister of Justice the Hon Kris Faafoi who has done such a good job in putting this together. This is a hard-working Minister who has just today put out another announcement on immigration and we couldn't be more proud. This Government is moving on with the mahi quietly—talking less working more. With that I commend this bill to the House. Kia ora.
Prime Willow-Jean; Rurawhe AdrianWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland): Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. Tēnā tātou katoa i tēnei ata. Thank you Mr Speaker for this opportunity to take a brief call on the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Bill. It was a privilege to sit on the Justice Committee ably chaired by Ginny Andersen. It was a very interesting select committee process—the submissions that we received but also the engagement thorough engagement with the officials as we discussed and debated questioned and probed—in particular for me the definitions of terror" and of "intimidation"; that was one that we spent a lot of time on. I really appreciated the efforts of the officials to help us truly understand the difference between those and where we landed with agreement with the Opposition the National Party in terms of recommending as a way forward that "intimidation" be the definition that we use.We have this legislation because of a recommendation that came out of the royal commission into the March 15 attacks and it was really unfortunate that during the select committee process we had another situation occur. But prior to that situation we had actually heard all of the submissions we had received the advice from the officials and we had had a lot of discussion and debate so I reject the previous member's Nicole McKee's assertions that this is virtue signalling; it certainly wasn't—it was already a process well in train and it was to try and prevent that very situation that occurred.I do not want to prolong this debate any further. I want to make sure that we have this legislation in place so that we can have better protections for terrorism in Aotearoa. Kia ora.DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call. I call the Hon Michael Woodhouse—five minutes."
Wednesday 29 September 2021 - Volume 754
COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 45New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Motion agreed to.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is That the COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2) be reported to the House by 11 November 2021 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 193 195 and 196.Motion agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill No 2) be now read a first time.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 45New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time. Bill referred to the Health Committee.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.SPEAKER: The question now is that the motion is agreed to.Hon Member: No there's an amendment.SPEAKER: Sorry? Oh sorry. I apologise. There is an amendment in the name of the Hon Michael Woodhouse. The question is that the amendment be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the words in the motion 14 October 2021" be deleted and replaced with "14 November 2021".Ayes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the COVID-19 Response (Management Measures) Legislation Bill be reported to the House by 14 October 2021 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 193 195 and 196.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to."
COVID-19 Response (Management Measures) Legislation Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the COVID-19 Response (Management Measures) Legislation Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 108New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is that the COVID-19 Response (Management Measures) Legislation Bill be considered by the Finance and Expenditure Committee.Motion agreed to.Bill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee.
10. Question No.10—ChildrenNICOLE McKEE (ACT) on behalf of KAREN CHHOUR (ACT) to the Minister for ChildrenQuestion No.10—Children10. NICOLE McKEE (ACT) on behalf of KAREN CHHOUR (ACT) to the Minister for Children: Is the wellbeing and best interests of the child or young person the first and paramount consideration of Oranga Tamariki and does he believe that Oranga Tamariki has placed the wellbeing of the child before all other considerations in its actions?Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Children): To the first part it should always be yes. To the second part no.Nicole McKee: Is it Oranga Tamariki's policy to reverse uplift children who have been placed in loving safe and stable families because of cultural factors?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: It'll be Oranga Tamariki's policy to prevent children from going into State care in the first place.Nicole McKee: Does he believe Oranga Tamariki has placed the wellbeing of the child first if it seeks to reverse uplift of a Māori child because a family couldn't meet the child's cultural needs when a psychological report found it would be extremely disruptive to her and could have significant long-lasting implications in terms of mental health"; if so why Minister?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: It depends on a child's circumstances. Like I say the first move should be to prevent children going into State care in the first place. If they need to go into State care then they should be in my opinion with whānau second. If there is no loving caring family that is of their whānau then any loving caring whānau is what is in the best interests of the children.Nicole McKee: Does he believe that Oranga Tamariki placed the wellbeing of the child first where a judge in a recent case stated that staff were driven "more by ideology than workable child-centred outcomes"; if so why?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I have said that mistakes have been made and when mistakes have been made that Oranga Tamariki needs to fess up and fix things.Nicole McKee: Does he agree with the statement from a judge who ruled against Oranga Tamariki in a recent case that the judgment of Oranga Tamariki staff "was influenced by a view that regardless of all other facts and principles Māori children must be with Māori caregivers"; if not why not?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Because that particular case hasn't yet ended—there's still work to be done around that—I'd rather not comment on the judge's decision."
9. Question No. 9—HealthGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 9—Health9. GLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made on support for youth mental wellbeing?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Health): Today I announced that this Government has increased its targeted mental health and investment for rainbow young people taking the total amount of funding past our manifesto commitment to $4.6 million. This package consists of $3.2 million for primary mental health and addiction services for rainbow young people across the motu awarded to RainbowYOUTH and InsideOUT Kōaro; an $800000 top-up to the Rule Foundation's Rainbow Wellbeing Legacy Fund; and $600000 to deliver rainbow competency training to mental health and addiction workforces. Glen Bennett: What will this funding mean for rainbow young people's mental wellbeing?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: We know the rainbow community is more at risk and likely to experience poorer mental health and wellbeing discrimination harassment and bullying than the general population and this is of course unacceptable. This funding is to support projects activities and rainbow organisations to improve mental health outcomes for future generations of rainbow communities. RainbowYOUTH can now extend its peer support service nationwide and InsideOUT can expand its support service from 200 to 300 schools. Upskilling and supporting the mental health and addiction workforce will equip them to better respond to the needs of the rainbow community. The Rule Foundation has also approved grants to 12 initiatives to help people including Māori takatāpui and Pacific peoples; Indian ethnic and migrant communities; transgender non-binary intersex people; faith and independent rainbow tradespeople.Glen Bennett: What other announcements has he made on support for youth mental wellbeing?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: On Monday I announced that more than 20 community-led projects received a funding boost through the Youth Mental Wellbeing Fund to keep doing the important work that they do. I'm also very pleased that the fund which was brought forward due to the Delta outbreak was increased from an initial $1 million to $1.4 million because of the number of quality applications received. We've learnt from previous lockdowns that they are particularly challenging for young people so we moved quickly to make sure these supports could keep being there in their time of need. I might also add I'm very thankful for the support of our cooperation partner the Green Party in these initiatives.
7. Question No. 7—Arts Culture and HeritageWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland) to the Minister for Arts Culture and HeritageQuestion No. 7—Arts Culture and Heritage7. WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland) to the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage: What recent announcement has she made about support for the arts and culture sector? Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN (Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage) on behalf of the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage: Today we announced a targeted relief package to support the arts and culture sector. The Government has brought forward $37.5 million from within the COVID Recovery Programme. This will span across protecting jobs and supporting at-risk organisations key infrastructure artists sole traders creatives and projects as well as a future-focused fund aimed at providing confidence for future performances and events. The package we've announced recognises that something more immediate is needed. We've worked with the sector to identify what the needs are and now we're delivering for them. Willow-Jean Prime: Why is this support important for the arts and culture sector? Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: On behalf of the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage: the arts and culture sector have been hit hard so we are supporting them as we have done with other sectors. They continue to be an engine of growth in innovation helping to fuel our economy. The support announced today underlines the economic value of the arts given the sector contributed $10.8 billion to New Zealand's GDP in 2019 and has created more than 92000 jobs. Today's announcement is about protecting people's jobs incomes and the livelihoods of those who make a living from delivering arts and cultural experiences here in Aotearoa. Willow-Jean Prime: How can people in the sector access the support? Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: On behalf of the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage: people will be able to access targeted relief through entities such as Creative New Zealand the New Zealand Film Commission the New Zealand Music Commission and Te Papa/Museums Aotearoa. The Cultural Sector Emergency Relief Fund will open on 1 October and can be found on Manatū Taonga's website. It is intended to be a last resort fund for organisations and sole traders. The support is there and I wholly endorse the sector to tap on in to it.
Counter-Terrorism Legislation Bill — Third Reading
Henderson EmilyDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): I rise to take a short call on this matter where it was my privilege to sit on the Justice Committee and to consider this bill the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Bill. I want first to acknowledge the victims of the Christchurch attack and more recently the LynnMall attack. I secondly want to thank as the chair Ginny Andersen did the officials who worked so hard to ensure that we had the right information before us. But I want to focus in my few words on the submitters because there were serious issues raised. This is a very serious piece of legislation. I want to join actually with Mr Bridges in assuring those submitters that we did not truncate the process of consideration for this bill. It was deeply considered and their words were heard with the help of those officials. There were intense and robust discussions. We questioned ourselves but ultimately we believe that this bill is important for the protection of New Zealand and the prevention of further attacks. And I wholeheartedly and conscientiously commend this bill to the House.
Cameron MarkMARK CAMERON (ACT): Well thank you Madam Speaker. Hubris is a word we hear a lot on this side of the House when referencing what this Government does. And this piece of legislation and its truncated process is just another illustration of a Government that seems to think that urgency is the best way to offer sensible public policy and lawmaking. I think we're acutely aware of the difficulties that this country's facing with COVID-19 especially given the Delta variant that we're all as a country dealing with. But when you look at the legislation the lack of rapid antigen testing as I think the previous speaker alluded to that this bill would not have the oversight for the managed isolation and quarantine facilitation and border restrictions this warrants a select committee process. We need the Government to allow the public to weigh in on this. This is a truncated process and this legislation speaks to a wider concern and the public should have a position to weigh in on it.So look we're quite clear on it as the ACT Party: we've got a Government that seems to use urgency to expeditiously create policy on the fly. We cannot support this in this current iteration. It's an erosion of all things we do as legislators representing New Zealand.
Luxton JoJO LUXTON (Labour—Rangitata): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'm really proud to take a call on this piece of legislation. I just want to remind members opposite that we are actually in the midst of a pandemic in case they had forgotten—a pandemic that we have not seen the likes of before. And in order to deal with a pandemic such as this we need to be able to adapt and evolve our legislation to ensure that we can deal with this current pandemic.Part of this piece of legislation talks about an increase in fees and infringements based on the type of rules that are potentially broken and if they are broken on purpose then people should have to pay accordingly. We've recently seen young people hiding in the boot of a car on their way to attend a tangi at their marae and as a result of that that marae is now in lockdown. So they intentionally broke the rules. So therefore we do need to be able to have the ability to ensure that people are held accountable for those.We had Mr Seymour talk about how the Government should be a bit more ambitious than sticking with the status quo. Well I say the status quo has seen us have more freedoms than many other countries around the world. If I think about Ireland that Penny Simmonds talked about they have had 387000 cases of COVID 5209 deaths 1497 cases yesterday in comparison to New Zealand—total of 4248 cases and 27 deaths. No deaths are acceptable but comparing ourselves to Ireland there is no comparison Ms Simmonds. So I am standing here very proudly to commend this bill to the House.
Bennett GlenGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth): Kia ora Madam Speaker thank you for allowing me to take a call on the COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2). Not sure how to respond really after the previous speaker Debbie Ngarewa-Packer but I know that I'm part of a Labour Party that has a strong Māori caucus committed to putting Māori to the front ensuring that it's not a fetish but it's a Te Tiriti responsibility to engage and walk alongside. As a proud member of the Labour Party as an ally as a tangata Tiriti I am proud to stand in support of this piece of legislation. Really simply the bill enables the public health response to COVID-19 to continue to function as it has in a coordinated and orderly way. Now I'm really glad to be in a nation that is coordinated and orderly and in my electorate of New Plymouth I'm really proud to see people adhering to the COVID-19 rules people willing to do the right thing not for themselves but generally for the people around them—those at risk those who are vulnerable. So I wanted to ensure that this is passed to enable that public health response to continue in a coordinated and orderly way and I support this bill.
Pallett SarahSARAH PALLETT (Labour—Ilam): Thank you Mr Speaker. Thank you. I rise to speak with pleasure to the COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2). This bill obviously has much to commend it but I was particularly interested to see the interest shown in the increase in court determined fines for the most serious intentional breaches which are those which create the most risk to our communities. I was really interested to hear the views of Mr Bishop and Ms Genter obviously coming from different points on the spectrum and obviously in disagreement on many points. I have to say I was somewhat surprised to note that National appeared to be soft on crime which is not a position I'd thought to see them take this year.But I really look forward to discussing this further in the Health Committee one of the hardest-working select committees in this Government. Thank you so much. I commend this bill to the House.
Sharma GauravDr GAURAV SHARMA (Labour—Hamilton West): Kia ora Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure of mine to speak today on the COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2). I want to start by thanking and congratulating this Government for first of all setting up a Minister for COVID-19. It is unprecedented to have a Minister responsible for a pandemic. Not a lot of countries have done something like this. And I want to thank the Minister for his COVID response in the last two years. I say this not only as a citizen of New Zealand where I haven't been infected by COVID but also as a front-line healthcare worker when I was swabbing patients last year. I say this as a member of Parliament for 64000 people in my electorate and I say this as a member of the Health Committee which this bill will go through.Looking back at all the bills that have come through this Parliament over the last few years I would say this has been one of the most significant to come through the Parliament. What's happened now is based on the feedback that has been received by the Government on the ground there have been certain changes that have been made in this No. 2 bill. That's what this Government is all about—listening to the people and reacting compared to the Opposition where I can't tell what their idea is because they're saying the bill's too late coming in yet they don't want to support it. If anything I would have thought it would have helped to keep the bill deferred for a few more weeks because by that time the Leader of the Opposition might have changed and they might have a new strategy on this.Somebody from the Opposition just talked about how a good Government would have had a bill like this earlier on. Well you've just released your policy on vaccination—SPEAKER: Order! Order! I haven't released any policies.Dr GAURAV SHARMA: Sorry—I mean the Opposition. So I would like to say this is one of the most important bills to come through the House and the changes in the No. 2 bill only build up on the first bill which was a great piece of legislation needed to keep this country safe and I would like to recommend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Craig LizDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. So just looking back to when all of us rapidly entered alert level 4 early last year I think none of us knew what to expect and yet when you actually look at what happened in the months that have followed we've been incredibly successful at preventing the spread of COVID-19. I think a lot of that is due to the fact that we had a really good consistent framework—a framework that included our very clear four-level alert level system which we've all become incredibly familiar with—and also just very clear requirements about entering managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) for anybody coming into New Zealand. Underpinning all of that has been the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act. That Act has worked by allowing for the creation of orders which then result in the development of many of our public health responses that have influenced so much of our day-to-day life over the past few months.I think the issue we've got is one of things this bill does is extends the life of that bill because that bill is due to be repealed in May 2020 and so what this bill is going to be doing is extending that out till May 2023. As the Minister has already mentioned there is a range of other things that this bill is going to be doing in terms of increasing some of the fines and fees relating to offences and non-compliance with these orders also looking at a whole lot of changes around MIQ. So there is a range of things that this bill does but the bottom line is it is going to make sure that we can continue to have an effective COVID-19 response into the future. So I commend this bill to the House.
Hipkins ChrisSITTINGS OF THE HOUSEHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That the sitting of the House today be extended into tomorrow morning for the first reading and referral to select committee of the COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2) and any instruction to the committee; the third readings of the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Bill and the Social Security (Subsequent Child Policy Removal) Amendment Bill; the first readings and referral to select committees of the Civil Aviation Bill the Electricity Industry Amendment Bill and the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill; and the committee stage of the Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Bill; and the second readings of the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill the Education and Training (Teaching Council Fees and Costs) Amendment Bill the Crown Pastoral Land Reform Bill and the Financial Markets (Conduct of Institutions) Amendment Bill.
Mallard Trevor; Webb Duncan; Pugh MaureenSPEAKER: The House is resumed. When we broke for the dinner break we were debating the referral motion for the COVID-19 Response (Management Measures) Legislation Bill.Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Junior Whip—Labour): I move That the question be now put.SPEAKER: I have no problem with taking this motion. I have watched the last couple of speeches and I'm convinced that the issues have been dealt with. The question is that the motion be agreed to.MAUREEN PUGH (Junior Whip—National): Point of order Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: A point of order?MAUREEN PUGH: Yes please.SPEAKER: Right. Well this is going to be interesting.MAUREEN PUGH: Well there are 17 pieces of legislation that affect several spokespeople—SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member's not arguing with me is she? You're not suggesting that I reverse my call when I ask that the motion be put? That is—if the member was more experienced I'd be convinced that she was grossly disorderly and the result of that is to go.Maureen Pugh: Can I seek your advice?SPEAKER: Well if the member wants to risk having an early night take another point of order. If it is out of order the member will have an early night. I don't know if that's regarded as a reward or a punishment at the moment.MAUREEN PUGH (Junior Whip—National): So Mr Speaker I just don't know where then I would sit a point of order or where I would put a point of order if you've already put the motion. So how do I get a chance to put my point of order if you're putting the motion?SPEAKER: Well the—it's after dinner and I'm going to be reasonable because the member did actually do exactly what I asked her not to do. There is no point of order that a member can take to debate whether the Speaker is going to put a closure motion. There is no point of order whatsoever.
Boyack RachelRACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson): Mr Speaker it's a pleasure to be back in Parliament and to take the final call on this bill in this House. I want to begin by thanking particularly the staff at Parliament for all the incredible mahi that they are doing to keep all of us safe. I particularly want to thank the clerks the messengers all of our own staff the security team and the catering team many of whom have been working from home and working exceptionally hard to keep this Parliament running.I want to reflect on the speech from the leader of the ACT Opposition tonight because quite frankly I found—David Seymour: The ACT Opposition.RACHEL BOYACK: The leader of the Opposition is fine by me. Quite frankly I found it a bizarre speech from the leader of a party that claims to be the party for small business because there's a particular part of this law that we're introducing tonight which I want to reflect on that the people in my electorate of Nelson have been calling for. A great proportion of our businesses our small businesses work in hospitality in tourism and in the accommodation sector. The biggest cost that they have been raising with me as their MP is the cost of rent to keep their businesses running. They have been coming to me raising this issue and the Government has responded. We have responded by introducing law that will change the Property Law Act and the reason we are doing that Mr Seymour is so that we can ensure our small businesses our hospitality businesses our accommodation sector businesses our tourism businesses who face high rental fixed costs can survive. The feedback I've had from them today is that they are delighted. They are delighted that they are going to have the opportunity now to actually arrange a fair rent—because it's what's stifling their business. We know that in places like Nelson and places like Rotorua and Queenstown this has been a source of concern and it's been a source of frustration for me which I said a couple of weeks ago that large commercial landlords haven't been willing in my electorate to negotiate a fair rent so that we can keep our tourism businesses open.So I am delighted. It is bizarre to hear the ACT Party which claims to be the party for small business actually not backing a piece of law that will stop those small businesses from collapsing—because it will. And so on that note it is a pleasure to commend this bill to the House.
Omer IbrahimIBRAHIM OMER (Labour): Thank you. Xiexie Madam Speaker. I rise to take this short call on the COVID-19 Response (Management Measures) Legislation Bill first reading. This bill is an omnibus bill that amends more than one Act. The intention of the bill is to make amendments to matters that are aimed at assisting the Government of New Zealand and the people of New Zealand to effectively manage and recover from the impacts of COVID-19. This bill amends or modifies a range of legislation but I wanted to touch upon one of the Acts that it amends. Schedule 5 Ministry of Housing and Urban Development" contains amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The purpose of this amendment is to support tenants to stay at their rental homes during future outbreaks of COVID-19.Now I wanted to touch upon one example: I know a family who moved house during the latest outbreak during the level 4 lockdown. The landlord by no fault of his own said "The house is run down it's a health and safety issue I have to move you out." So because there is no law that stops that the family had to comply and move. So that was a risk to the family and to all of us. It could cause a massive outbreak here in Wellington.This bill does a lot of good things. It's not how the Opposition makes it sound—everything is negative. It's quite funny to see the Hon Scott Simpson talking in favour of climate change. When it suits your arguments you do things and you say things that you actually don't mean. We have to be consistent with our messaging to ensure that people have the right to stay at home during the outbreaks of COVID-19. As the Associate Minister of Housing the Hon Poto Williams said this is about futureproofing tenancies. We need to help end the impacts of COVID-19 restrictions of COVID-19 to ensure our laws are fair flexible and responsive. I commend this bill to the House."