edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
12. Forestry—Afforestation Grants Scheme 2016STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Associate Minister for Primary IndustriesForestry—Afforestation Grants Scheme 201612. STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Associate Minister for Primary Industries: How is the Government supporting the planting of new forests?Hon JO GOODHEW (Associate Minister for Primary Industries): Recently I announced the results of the Afforestation Grants Scheme's 2016 funding round. I am pleased to report to the House that more than 5.5 million seedlings will be planted next winter. With the approval by the Ministry for Primary Industries of 81 applications for 4818 hectares of new forest this is a fantastic result for forestry in New Zealand. That is 1900 hectares more than last year's funding round. The member will be pleased to hear that 333 hectares of new forests will be planted in the Marlborough region.Stuart Smith: How has increasing uptake of the scheme benefited regional New Zealand?Hon JO GOODHEW: Forests are a vital part of our economy whether it be for carbon absorption or reducing land erosion. This scheme is making a real contribution. Uptake for this scheme has nearly doubled and new forests will be planted in regions all around New Zealand providing a welcome source of new economic growth and employment opportunities through the $6.2 million investment. Regions that will benefit from new forests include the following: Hawke's Bay 555 hectares; Manawatū-Wanganui 755 hectares; Northland 440 hectares; Taranaki 594 hectares; and Waikato 547 hectares. They are but some of the regions that benefit. David Seymour: How did the Government decide that New Zealanders are planting an insufficient number of trees and how does the Government know what the correct or optimal number of trees to plant is?Hon JO GOODHEW: What the Government knew was that we had a previous Afforestation Grants Scheme that was very very popular. It encouraged often farm forestry exponents to plant trees in small lots on highly erodible land. They would otherwise not have done this. This is good for the climate this is good to prevent land erosion and it also gives employment to other people. This is a scheme that has a lot of positive benefits for New Zealand and that is why the Government is doing it.
10. Police—ResourcingSTUART NASH (Labour—Napier) to the Minister of PolicePolice—Resourcing10. STUART NASH (Labour—Napier) to the Minister of Police: When she said in an interview with Paul Henry yesterday that the over-engineering and overthinking that can happened when a government or a party has been in government for quite some time" means "it is really important just to get on with the job" was she referring to the fact that she has been working on a plan since June for more police but still nothing has been delivered?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police): No. I was referring to how this party is going to win the next election in 2017.Stuart Nash: When she stated yesterday that her vision for New Zealand is that "I need more police and I need them now." does that mean her vision is not currently shared by the Minister of Finance?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Not at all.Stuart Nash: When she stated in the House on Tuesday that "We will soon see will we not." in regard to whether the Minister of Finance has given her all the funding she needs what exactly did she mean?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Exactly what I said.Stuart Nash: Does she believe that the Police have enough resources to handle an increase in the youth justice age given that she stated in 2008 of any increase that people would "think we were a bunch of wussies" if it were to increase?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: If the member wants to go ahead and make an Official Information Act request for the Cabinet papers he will see that that matter has been dealt with.Stuart Nash: Now that she has delayed her bid for the leadership of her party until later next year can Police expect 6 more months of inaction on increasing police numbers because of Bill English's love of committee after committee as she so rightly highlighted yesterday?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: No."
9. Disability Issues—Disability StrategyBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country) to the Minister for Disability IssuesDisability Issues—Disability Strategy9. BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country) to the Minister for Disability Issues: What recent announcements has she made regarding initiatives that will help New Zealand to become a non-disabling society?Hon NICKY WAGNER (Minister for Disability Issues): I recently launched the new disability strategy which will guide the direction of Government agencies on disability issues for the next 10 years. It was developed after nationwide consultation with disabled people their families whānau and supporters. More than 1130 people attended workshops across the country and 770 submissions were received.Barbara Kuriger: How does the new disability strategy differ from the 2001 New Zealand Disability Strategy?Hon NICKY WAGNER: The new strategy will have teeth and it will be backed by supporting documents that will give tangible outcomes. It will work in conjunction with the Disability Action Plan and a new outcomes framework which will develop specific targets and indicators to measure the success of the strategy. Furthermore a disability data and evidence plan is being developed to ensure that the Government's decisions are based on the best possible evidence.
6. Tax System Changes—Small and Medium Sized EnterprisesJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of RevenueTax System Changes—Small and Medium Sized Enterprises6. JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Revenue: What recent reports has he received regarding the time money and effort that small and medium sized businesses spend on meeting their tax obligations?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Revenue): The Inland Revenue Department recently surveyed small and medium sized businesses to understand how much time money and effort they spend meeting their tax obligations. From the surveyed group of over 4000 small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) the results show that overall these SMEs consider that compliance costs have reduced considerably since 2013 and that the time investment required has halved since 2004. Overall the median time SMEs spend meeting their tax obligations was 25 percent less than in 2013. Because they are spending less time the median value of their in-house costs has also reduced by 24 percent. A further 87 percent said that it required about the same or less effort as it did a year before.Jonathan Young: What factors were identified by small and medium sized business owners as contributing to the overall reduction in compliance costs?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: The survey outlined several things some of which the Inland Revenue Department is already doing but notably the promotion of the Inland Revenue Department's reminder service that notifies customers when their filing payment dates have passed an acknowledgment by email when all returns and payments are received by the Inland Revenue Department less paperwork required and better utilisation of digital filing channels. The survey findings reinforced the success of the actions that the Inland Revenue Department has been trying to do to make it easier for customers to meet their tax obligations.Jonathan Young: What opportunities did the survey identify to further reduce compliance costs for small and medium sized businesses?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Several things: the promotion of the reminder service as I mentioned; an acknowledgment by email when all returns and payments are received by the Inland Revenue Department; and improving the content and functionality of IRD's website like simplifying language. Furthermore stage one of the Inland Revenue Department's long-term business transformation programme will be implemented early next year allowing customers to better self-manage GST through a modernised and simplified online tax system making it even easier for SMEs to meet their tax obligations.Rt Hon Winston Peters: What on earth is wrong with the publication system within his office that a backbench member of the National Government has not been sent this review so that he has to get up in this House and tediously and boringly waste this Parliament's time?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I am quite sure that the member for New Plymouth not only received the review but read it in detail and like me wants to share very good news with the House and the New Zealand public.
3. Corrections Department—Corrections InspectorateIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Minister of CorrectionsCorrections Department—Corrections Inspectorate3. IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Minister of Corrections: What recent announcement has she made about strengthening the independent oversight of the Corrections system?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections): Since earlier this year I have been working with the State Services Commission to strengthen the oversight of the Corrections inspectorate. Inspectors were established to provide assurance around the delivery of Corrections services. They visit all public and private prisons investigate incidents investigate complaints and undertake thematic reviews. They produce reports and recommendations that are considered by the chief executive. However there has not been additional scrutiny or visibility of these reports and Corrections will now provide me with regular reporting detailing the inspectors' recommendations and the chief executive's response to those recommendations as well as the dates of implementation of actions. I have also asked the State Services Commission to work with the department to look at potential options to enhance the powers of the inspectorate through amendments to the Corrections Act.Ian McKelvie: How will these changes make Corrections inspectorate reporting more transparent?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: The new policy will require Corrections to publish summary reporting in full inspectorate reports when appropriate with necessary steps to protect privacy and security. It is my view that as appropriate in terms of safety security and privacy public visibility of our prisons should be the norm. There are actually a lot of good-news stories coming out of our prisons: the efforts that go into rehabilitation learning are huge and some of the results are outstanding. The staff are so committed to making a positive difference and I do like to be able to highlight the positive when I can. But the reality is that things will and do go wrong at times when managing some of New Zealand's most difficult people and public transparency of the system whether it is good or bad is critical.
2. Finance Minister—Ministers' Funding RequestsANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Minister of FinanceFinance Minister—Ministers' Funding Requests2. ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement Ministers find it a little bit irritating" when asking for funding and which Ministers was he referring to?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): I stand by my full statement which was: "All propositions … for the expenditure of significant public money … have to go through a thorough process. Sometimes Ministers find it a little bit irritating." Probably all Ministers find it a little bit irritating at some stage. However we know that that did not happen in the last Labour Government because it just shovelled out money to any Minister who asked for anything.Andrew Little: Did the Minister of Police become irritated when his—the Minister's—underfunding forced her to break her election promise to maintain a police to population ratio of 1:500?Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well I am not exactly sure what the member is referring to but you would expect that in a Government that focuses on law and order and the safety of our communities there is always discussion about how we can deal with those issues.Andrew Little: Did the Minister of Police ask him in June for more funding for more police and did he notice her irritation?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Minister of Police like the Minister of Health and all other Ministers I have found to be persistent and a strong advocate not just for more money—fortunately in this Government—but for the more effective use of public money to get results. That is how we all operate.Andrew Little: Does he find it a little bit irritating that after he and Jonathan Coleman agreed to keep health $1.7 billion underfunded Jonathan Coleman is now publicly complaining health is not properly funded?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I am not sure what the member is referring to but no I do not find it irritating.Andrew Little: Is he proud that his $1.7 billion underfunding of health has led to patients in Dunedin being served reheated slop that was cooked in Auckland?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I understand the provision of food in Dunedin as tested by the Minister of Health actually was not too bad. But in respect of health funding this Government makes it quite clear that it will fund services that make a difference to people's lives.Andrew Little: Did he find it a little bit irritating when Paula Bennett announced her relocation grants policy the day before the Budget without telling him?Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. It is great to see Ministers taking initiative. And in general I do not get nearly as irritated as that member. Andrew Little: Did he find it a little bit irritating to discover that Simon Bridges' bridges policy had been invented the night before its release and against New Zealand Transport Agency advice that these bridges were not a prudent use of taxpayer funds?Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. But the Government disagreed with the advice and Northlanders are seeing progress on those bridges."
Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill — Third Reading
Foster-Bell PaulPAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): E Te Mana Whakawā Tuarua tēnā koe. Tēnā koutou katoa e ngā mema o Te Whare Pāremata o Aotearoa. In briefly taking a call on the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill I want to acknowledge the excellent constructive collaboration we have had with members of the Opposition. This is not a completely unique experience for me in this House but it is a relative rarity that we have had absolute commitment from I think all parties in this House to see that the people of Kaikōura in particular but even further afield here in the Wellington region are well supported in the recovery phase of this process as we recover from the Kaikōura sequence—the series of earthquakes and subsequent damage that has resulted.I do want to point out that there were a few areas of contention between Government and Opposition members. I personally felt quite strongly that the powers did need to be broad enough in their geographic scope given consequences of the earthquake that may even now not be fully known or understood—for instance here in the Wellington region we have challenges around the port of Wellington. It is built on land that is often described as reclaimed; much of the port land in fact was thrust up out of the ocean in 1851 during that last massive earthquake we had here in Wellington. The land is unstable and there are several operational difficulties that the port still faces. I was quite keen to see this legislation broad enough in its geographic scope. Notwithstanding the constitutional concerns of certain academics I wanted to make sure that this bill was broad enough in its geographical scope to be able to ameliorate the port get it back working to be able to see the exports flowing out of our region overseas to the benefit of New Zealanders—in particular residents of Wellington Central and the wider Wellington area which I am delighted to live in. This is an important necessary and urgent piece of legislation. It has been very responsibly handled by this House. It has gone through the Local Government and Environment Committee which has been masterfully chaired by my friend and colleague Scott Simpson the honourable member for Coromandel but I do acknowledge across the House the collaboration from other parties along with Mr Simpson Sarah Dowie Joanne Hayes Nuk Korako Matt Doocey and myself as the permanent Government members of the committee. This is something that we should actually collectively be proud of achieving for our country. We are a mature and responsible democracy and this bill is evidence of that.
Dowie Sarah; Tisch LindsaySARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): I rise in support of the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill in this its third reading. Given that this House is in consensus at this time in respect of this bill and that there have been some very good contributions I am not going to concentrate on the technicalities of the bill. I am simply going to focus on the people and say to them that across the Government and across the House there is support for the recovery of Kaikōura and Hurunui hence we are doing everything we can to assist that. We must remember that these people are living day to day with the challenges that a significant event such as an earthquake brings and we cannot underestimate what they are living with. The reason I raise this is that we are in December now and we are moving into the Christmas period and most of us will go away. We will go away on holiday and we will do our thing with our friends and family and that will be all very nice but of course the people in North Canterbury and Kaikōura will still be living with the effects of that earthquake. It will take some time to repair and get Kaikōura and the other surrounding areas on track so we should spare a thought for them over the December period the Christmas period and make sure that these people are still on our minds.So look this is a good bill. It is designed through Orders in Council to allow the relevant Minister to make assessments in conjunction with the independent panel about what is required to be done on the ground and to execute that expediently with the checks and balances in place. With that I just again congratulate my colleague Mr Stuart Smith on the work that he has done on the ground the Government on the work that it has done coming in behind the people of Kaikōura and North Canterbury and I commend this bill to the House.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Eugenie Sage—5 minutes.
Whaitiri MekaMEKA WHAITIRI (Labour—Ikaroa-Rāwhiti): E Te Māngai o Te Whare tēnā koe. E ngā mema o Te Whare nei tēnā tātou katoa. It is indeed my honour and privilege to rise and take a call on this third and final reading of the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill. The bill creates a power for Government Ministers to override primary legislation in their portfolio area to assist the recovery from the Kaikōura earthquake.This legislation is similar to that passed after the Christchurch earthquake but much more limited with a number of checks and balances. Orders in Council can be related only to the earthquake and the purposes of the legislation. The powers and orders may expire on 1 April 2018. Only legislation listed in schedule 2 may be amended without Parliament's approval. A review panel must be consulted on the legislation and the Regulations Review Committee will receive orders prior to being implemented and will be able to move that they be disallowed. Finally an order cannot impinge on human rights.It is a great day to stand in this House and do our small part to help the communities of Kaikōura and Hurunui particularly in their recovery. This bill clearly is an enabler to assist that. Labour is pleased that the Government has implemented many of the suggestions made during the select committee. We acknowledge the Minister and his attendance at our committee the Local Government and Environment Committee yesterday and taking on many of those suggestions. I do not want to prolong the debate. It is an important bill. I know that for the people of Kaikōura particularly anticipating this will help somewhat on that road of recovery. Again I want to acknowledge the officials who supported us. Just in closing to the member of Kaikōura Stuart Smith and obviously our member here Rino Tirikatene please take our warm wishes from this House to the communities that you represent. We are thinking of them particularly as we go into summer and Christmas. They will be doing it hard and they definitely will be in my thoughts—best wishes to them as we see in the new year and particularly Christmas. With that I commend this bill to the House.
Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Labour): I think the Minister has very fairly described the checks and balances that are included in the bill. There is a discrete list of Acts to be overridden. There are real restrictions on it being able to be extended as to the scope of Acts that can be overridden including an affirmative resolution effectively eventually being needed in this Parliament. I would have preferred Parliament making that decision in the first place but I think that is a reasonable place to land. I referred to the geographical area of the bill in the Committee stage and I do not want to say anything extra other than to record that the Hutt City Council recorded that it already has the powers it needs under the Building Act to take the buildings down that it needs to get taken down following the earthquake. I do accept that there is the possibility that there could be other buildings where the owner is reluctant to demolish them quickly enough even though there are safety risks caused to other buildings that might necessitate some override of existing legislation. So on that basis I am not going to make anything more of that. I add my thanks to my fellow select committee members—I think we all worked well together—and to the officials. They were very very professional. I think the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet has served the Government and our country well as have the other agencies that supported it. A final thing in respect of the roading issues I agree with Minister Brownlee and I do have some trust in the roading authorities. When they came before us at the select committee they noted that they have various protocols that they use. They are aware that they have got to minimise the fines going into the marine environment. They also note that they are already going in from some of the existing slips that are continuing and will continue to erode the foreshore and seabed area if they are not remedied. So there can be wins there as well. I have got nothing further to add. I commend the bill to the House.
Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Labour): I move That the question be now put.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 255 in the name of the Hon Gerry Brownlee be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.
Smith StuartSTUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura): It is a pleasure to make a contribution at this stage of the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill and on behalf of the good people of Kaikōura I would like to thank the Local Government and Environment Committee and its able chair Scott Simpson for the collegiality of the select committee in working very hard on this bill. I know that the members sat for very long hours and the officials and advisers who did all the work around that as well should also be thanked for their hard work. I know they burnt the midnight oil to ensure this bill was before us today. I can tell you that it means a heck of a lot to those people.I was in Kaikōura this morning. I got back just in time for this afternoon and they are already asking questions about when this is all going to be able to be enacted and when they can start the recovery phase. I know that it has been over 3 weeks since the earthquake and that a heck of a lot has happened but if you are the people living in it it seems a heck of a long time. So they are really very grateful that things are moving. I told them that I was coming back here today and that this would be passed today so I really do thank everybody across the House on their behalf. I think that all of this work you have put into this bill—particularly as has been alluded to the advisory panel—really does make this bill a good step forward in the management of the recovery. I think that had it not had that panel—that was really the icing on the cake if you like or the final check and balance along the way. It was talked about earlier by one of the previous speakers about perhaps having an on-the-shelf piece of legislation but when you look at this incident compared with the Christchurch earthquakes they have quite a different profile in terms of the damage and what areas were affected. I suspect that each event will have its own nuances and a one-size-fits-all piece of legislation would have to be so broad that we would run into all the sorts of issues that have been the points of debate around this particular bill anyway. I think that although a lot of work has been caused for the Local Government and Environment Committee and officials to get this through in a quick and timely manner I cannot see any other way of handling a recovery bill like this.Once again I would like to thank everyone concerned. I cannot add any more on the technical details as I was not on the select committee but as I said earlier there are a whole lot of people watching and listening to this today who are very keen on this getting passed. So I will not delay it any further. Thank you.
Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill — Second Reading
Brownlee GerryIn CommitteeHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I seek leave for the Committee stage of the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill to be taken as one question with multiple calls given the process that has been used to develop it.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection to that course of action? There appears to be none.
Brownlee GerryHURUNUI/KAIKŌURA EARTHQUAKES RECOVERY BILLSecond ReadingHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Minister of Civil Defence): I move That the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill be now read a second time.Bill read a second time.
Brownlee Gerry; Hipkins ChrisTHURSDAY 8 DECEMBER 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 13 December the Government will look to complete the first reading of the Point England Development Enabling Bill the second reading of the Taxation (Business Tax Exchange of Information and Remedial Matters) Bill the Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill (No 2) and a number of other bills on the Order Paper. The House will rise for the year on Wednesday 14 December at the conclusion of the adjournment debate which will confirm the House sitting dates for 2017. CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): If this does indeed turn out to be the Leader of the House's final business statement to the House can I thank him on behalf of the Opposition for his contribution and can I also indicate to him that if he is looking for something to do in the new year there is an opening on the parliamentary catering committee and we could in fact use his assistance.Mr SPEAKER: I will certainly enjoy the right of reply—the Hon Gerry Brownlee.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I thank the shadow Leader of the House for that expression but I have got to say that like so many on occasions like this sort of fuelled by the clouds of delusion about self-importance I had not actually considered such a prospect.
Wednesday 7 December 2016 - Volume 719
Charter Schools (Application of Official Information and Ombudsmen Acts) Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Charter Schools (Application of Official Information and Ombudsmen Acts) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Environment Canterbury (Democracy Restoration) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
Environment Canterbury (Democracy Restoration) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question that the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Could I just while the Clerk is adding them up remind members that votes are meant to be held in silence. While I am at it I will remind Mr McKelvie that he does not wander round and interject. He interjects when seated if at all.A party vote was called for on the question That the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Private International Law (Choice of Law in Tort) Bill — First Reading
VotePRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW (CHOICE OF LAW IN TORT) BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 30 November.A party vote was called for on the question That the Private International Law (Choice of Law in Tort) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 108New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee.
2. Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill—NecessityPITA PARAONE (NZ First) to the Member in charge of the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment BillLand Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill—Necessity2. PITA PARAONE (NZ First) to the Member in charge of the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill: Why is the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill needed if according to LINZ transactions by foreign buyers are only 3 percent?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Member in charge of the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill): Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) data has more holes than Swiss cheese given there was no statement at all for 38 percent of foreign sales. We also note from an Official Information Act request that the Inland Revenue Department does not record information based on tax residency". That is a Grand Canyon - wide hole right there. What we have with the LINZ data is an honesty box based on an unverified self-declaration that the IRD has no means of verifying. To conclude this is why this dynamic bill is definitely needed by our country.Pita Paraone: What is the potential scale of investment New Zealand could expect that requires this bill's introduction?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Bloomberg reports that current property investments from China are about US$234 billion. Capital Economics estimates that Chinese capital outflows in October 2016 reached US$73 billion while Bloomberg intelligence estimated that in the 9 months through to September US$620 billion flowed out of China. Having little restrictions while other countries erect their barriers means we could be swamped very quickly and we should not just walk away and betray the country like the Māori Party.Mr SPEAKER: Order!"
1. Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill—International PracticeRIA BOND (NZ First) to the Member in charge of the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment BillQUESTIONS TO MEMBERSLand Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill—International Practice1. RIA BOND (NZ First) to the Member in charge of the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill: Why is it important that the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill passes its first reading today?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Member in charge of the Land Transfer (Foreign Ownership of Land Register) Amendment Bill): As we twiddled our thumbs legislation to establish a new register for foreign ownership of water access entitlements in Australia passed the federal Senate at the end of November. In addition to Australia having an agricultural land register soon foreign investors there will be required to notify the Australian Taxation Office of any water entitlements they hold on a yearly basis.Hon Gerry Brownlee: What?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: We need to take off our blinkers bring Gerry halfway awake and pass this bill.Ria Bond: Are there any other jurisdictions looking to do something similar to the member's bill?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Absolutely. Aside from our second-largest trading partner Australia the UK Government is also committed to a public register of foreign companies purchasing UK property by April 2018. I can also add that the Netherlands France Ireland and Norway are all moving towards land registers—like we are—either this year or very early next year when they fly the white flag as well. Currently New Zealand is an all-you-can-eat foreign property - owning smorgasbord.
10. Fiscal Strategy—Government Financial Position and SpendingRt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Minister of FinanceFiscal Strategy—Government Financial Position and Spending10. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all his statements; if so how?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): Yes in the context in which they were made. Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well does he stand by his statement—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The member needs to stand call and then I call a supplementary question.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well I am calling. I am standing for a supplementary question. Mr SPEAKER: Supplementary question—[Interruption] Order! I just need to explain to the member—and I should not have to—that the member stands he calls Supplementary question?"; if he gains my attention I call him to ask the question. He does not lead straight into it. Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he stand by his statement that he is fit to be the Prime Minister of New Zealand?Mr SPEAKER: In so far as there is ministerial responsibility—the Hon Bill English. Hon BILL ENGLISH: Yes.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Minister what was the amount and percentage of public debt in 2008 when you took office as the Minister of Finance and what is the amount and percentage of public debt today?Hon BILL ENGLISH: When we took office it was single digits like 7 or 8 percent of GDP. It was just before the global financial crisis and the Christchurch earthquakes for which we borrowed I think almost $18 billion. But of course the member would think we should have just left them to it.Rt Hon Winston Peters: If as Minister he is responsible for freezing the Police budget and the lack of policing resourcing and responsible for the decrease in real terms of the Health budget would he agree that it is disgraceful to hold a ministerial warrant and announce a belt-tightening Budget and then claim an accommodation allowance worth over $30000 to live in his $1.2 million Wellington home?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Police has not had a frozen budget and I invite the member to just look at the Police budget numbers. I think last year it was something over 4 years like $200 million in wage increases for everyone in the police force. The member may not count that as a relevant expenditure of public money but we certainly do.David Seymour: What percentage of GDP did Treasury recently forecast public debt would reach under historical spending patterns as advocated by parties such as New Zealand First?Mr SPEAKER: Order! The last part of the question—[Interruption] Order! The last part of the question is completely out of order. The first part of the question can be addressed. Hon BILL ENGLISH: When we did take office in 2008 and Treasury did its forecasts based on the expenditure pattern of the previous coalition Government it showed never-ending rising public debt. That is if we had followed that pattern public debt would never stop going up."
8. Crown Land Development Programme—Housing DevelopmentsKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister for Building and HousingCrown Land Development Programme—Housing Developments8. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister for Building and Housing: What new housing developments has he announced as part of the Crown Land programme and how many homes will it provide?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Building and Housing): Yesterday I announced a new 300-home development on part of the Point England Reserve with Ngāti Paoa and the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company. For the last 30 years 18 hectares of the 48-hectare reserve have been used for grazing cows. This is poor use of land that is only 12 kilometres from Auckland's CBD. The cows will go and 12 hectares will now be used for housing and the remainder of the reserve will be developed into better amenity and recreation space. The Government is committed to all of the proceeds of the land being used for housing and to be reinvested locally—a position that has been strongly advocated for by the MP for Maungakiekie Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga and Auckland Council.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: How will this Point England housing development help support the Tāmaki project? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The major challenge with the Tāmaki redevelopment of 2800 homes into 7500 is the provision of housing in the interim for the large number of families dislocated during the demolition and reconstruction phases. The great advantage of this Point England project is that providing 300 additional homes in close proximity will enable that largest redevelopment project in New Zealand history to be able to be accelerated. Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: How many sites have now been confirmed under the Government's Crown land programme and how many homes are being built?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: We have now announced nine sites in the Crown land programme which will deliver over 1500 homes. Four of them are partnerships with the private sector and five including Point England announced yesterday are with iwi partners. Announcements in the last month include 60 in Te Atatū 120 in Great North Road and Waterview and 100 in New North Road in Mount Albert. Further sites are well advanced and by the end of this financial year there will be over a billion dollars' worth of additional housing in the pipeline. In fact this year the Government will be directly involved in building more houses than at any time in New Zealand's history.
7. Ministers—ConfidenceJAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime MinisterMinisters—Confidence7. JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.James Shaw: Does he have confidence in Jonathan Coleman and does he even know what he looks like?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes. I am pretty sure he is the one that is just over there. But you know given he has been in quite a number of my Cabinets and I am awake for most of them—absolutely.James Shaw: Does he have confidence that if Judith Collins becomes Prime Minister New Zealand will not wake up one day and find itself tied with Zimbabwe on the Transparency International corruption index?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have absolute confidence in Judith Collins and I have absolute confidence in all of my caucus and my Cabinet colleagues.James Shaw: Does he have confidence that if Steven Joyce becomes the finance Minister he will not lose the entire surplus on one of those roulette wheels he gave to Skycity Casino?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Here is a prediction: when the Skycity Auckland Convention Centre opens in I think it is 2019 from memory it will be a sparkling asset used by many convention-dwellers both internationally and locally. It will not cost a cent of taxpayer or ratepayer money and if it is true to form the Labour Party members who will still be in Opposition will be coming over to the opening just like they did when they objected to The Hobbit and so many other things in the past. James Shaw: Is the real reason that New Zealand's productivity is so low because every working-age New Zealander has been bored to death listening to Bill English?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: If that is his test then I should introduce him to his own caucus colleagues. Man they are not exactly people I want to party with when I leave Parliament—let me give you a clue. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I dealt with the showing of those visual aids by New Zealand First earlier. If it continues again from any of those members they will be leaving the Chamber. I do not want to have to issue that warning again.James Shaw: Now that he knows who his likely successors are is he tempted to turn round and say: Actually Bill I've changed my mind."? Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Definitely not. As I said on Monday it has been a great privilege to be Prime Minister of New Zealand for the last 8 years and to lead such a fantastic Cabinet and caucus. I am immensely proud of what this Government has achieved but as I said on Monday I have called time on my own political career and I will not be turning back on that decision.Hon Gerry Brownlee: In his long and successful tenure as Prime Minister over the last 8 years in this House does he recall a day when the Greens have put more effort into their questions?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No but it is good to see that they are getting the hang of it because they are going to be asking questions for a very long time."
6. Police—Resourcing and NumbersGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of PolicePolice—Resourcing and Numbers6. GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of Police: Does she believe Police have been given adequate resources to address crime in all areas; if not which areas are in need of further resources?Hon Members: Given up on finance?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police): I do not think that member is going to have any better luck with this than he does with finance but there you go. Police has been given substantial resources by National with an injection of 600 extra police and a budget of $1.6 billion up from $1.2 billion under Labour. As I have often said it has been doing an excellent job with those resources. As I have also said—repeatedly—Police will need more numbers going into the future. As to where further resources should go I actually think everywhere. I want to see an increased police presence around the country—rural regional in our biggest city and in our centres. I want to see more police out there making New Zealanders feel safe and secure preventing crime and ultimately making New Zealand the safest country in the world.Grant Robertson: Given her statement on the need for more police I've been [asking] since June and I've been waiting for that to happen." who is responsible for that not happening?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: If the member had listened to previous questions in the House and if he had ever been a Minister he would know that these matters go through a Cabinet process. These matters are not just putting a few numbers on the back of an envelope—Andrew Little: Why have you complained about it then?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: —and waking them up. It is not a complaint. The member asks why I am complaining; I am not complaining at all. I am just stating the fact. It has been a long process and a very thorough process.Grant Robertson: Will she provide additional police resources to tackle the theft of public money such as someone who uses a taxpayer-funded trip to China to advance their husband's business interests? [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question can be addressed.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: If that were the case then it would be. Of course it is not.Grant Robertson: In light of her statement that she "does not bear grudges" can we bury the hatchet today and will she tell me once and for all who was the border official at the dinner in China?Mr SPEAKER: There is no ministerial responsibility there at all."
5. Accident Compensation Corporation—LeviesMAUREEN PUGH (National) to the Minister for ACCAccident Compensation Corporation—Levies5. MAUREEN PUGH (National) to the Minister for ACC: What changes to ACC levies come into effect from 1 April next year?Hon NATHAN GUY (Acting Minister for ACC): Today I am pleased to announce further cuts to ACC work and motor vehicle levies. This will mean savings of $126 million over the next 2 years for New Zealand businesses and motorists. Today's cuts come on top of more than $2 billion worth of ACC levy cuts that Kiwis have enjoyed under this Government since 2012. ACC is now in great financial shape. It is confident it can meet the lifetime costs of all claims on its books reassuring those with more serious injuries who need lifelong support.Maureen Pugh: How much will individual businesses and motorists save as a result of those cuts?Hon NATHAN GUY: The exact levy that businesses and motorists pay depends on their particular circumstances. In general the average work levy is reducing from 80c to 72c per $100 of liable earnings a reduction of 10 percent. The average motor vehicle levy which includes the annual licence levy and petrol levy will reduce by around $16 a reduction of about 12.5 percent. The petrol levy itself will reduce from 6.9c to 6c per litre a reduction of 13 percent. These reductions have been made possible by the improved financial management of ACC under our watch which has seen significant improvements in the funding position of all levied accounts.
Scott AlastairCRIMES (INCREASED PENALTY FOR PROVIDING EXPLOSIVE TO COMMIT CRIME) AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): I move That the Crimes (Increased Penalty for Providing Explosive to Commit Crime) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Law and Order Committee to consider this bill. I am pleased to have my member's bill drawn from the ballot. This bill will amend section 272 of the Crimes Act 1961 to increase the maximum penalty for providing explosives to commit an offence from 2 years' to 5 years' imprisonment. At present there is an inconsistency between the maximum penalties for people who provide explosives compared with people who have possession of a dangerous weapon. The maximum penalty for providing explosives to commit an offence is 2 years' imprisonment. Considering the harm and death that explosives can cause a 2-year prison sentence does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the offence or the potential for harm.In this day and age the use of explosives internationally has increased. It has increased in New Zealand as well as in other parts of the world over recent years. From 1980 to 2015 there were 26 charges of providing explosives to commit crime. Of those there were four imprisonments. Under this bill there could be longer sentencing periods for those. Again I would like to reiterate that explosives cause immeasurable harm to innocent bystanders. This bill is sending a strong message that supplying explosives is unacceptable.Another reason for this bill is to fix up inconsistent sentencing guidelines in the Crimes Act. Under section 202A individuals carrying or possessing dangerous weapons unlawfully are potentially liable for a longer term of imprisonment than an individual who knowingly provides explosives intending to endanger property or people. So that does not make sense. That is what this member's bill is about.A person carrying an offensive weapon even when they do not cause any harm can face a term of imprisonment of up to 3 years and yet a person who provides an explosive such as a bomb knowing it will be used to commit a crime can be committed to prison only for up to 2 years. We do not want harsh penalties for relatively minor offences and soft penalties for offences that have the potential to cause major harm to people and the community. This is why a change is appropriate.Providing an explosive to someone for the purpose of an offence is objectively worse than simply carrying an offensive weapon and so the maximum sentence should therefore be higher. A maximum 5-year term of imprisonment is needed to adequately reflect the seriousness of the offence and to deter others without being unnecessarily harsh. The offence does not have a minimum penalty so when sentencing for this offence arises in court a judge can impose what he or she considers to be a fair and reasonable penalty.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 10 p.m.