edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Simmonds PennyPENNY SIMMONDS (National—Invercargill): Thank you Mr Speaker. Well I'm pleased to be standing and speaking on the Crimes (Child Exploitation Offences) Amendment Bill in this its third reading. Of course National supports the bill.As we've heard the bill creates those two new offences under the Crimes Act 1961 regarding the person over the age of 18 using social media or some form of digital communication to communicate with an under-age child—someone under the age of 16—with the intent to mislead that young person or to indeed cause harm to that young person. As we've heard it is that act of grooming that pre-offence behaviour that now is being dealt with in this legislation. It would I guess have been a real catch-up to rather than waiting—having to wait until an offence has occurred. Of course none of us want to see that happening.It is vitally important to keep our children safe. We've all talked about our children or our grandchildren being much much more au fait with the digital platforms and the digital communications than those of us that are older are. I watch my four- and five-year-old grandchildren on their devices and we can easily see how it could be that they could be groomed without having any idea that this is happening to them because—presumably under 16—they would be flattered by attention and they would not know to think or look further as to whether that person might be intending to mislead them or cause some harm. They would be taking on face value the communications that they were getting.I would have to say there is some good work going on out in the sector on educating young people. I was at the Community Trust South and we gave funding to organisations with the intent of educating young people on what to look for what to be concerned about. So that ties in with this legislation now—that if they do identify something then it is an offence and there can be penalties for it which are greater than previously. I was very pleased to hear an MP from the Government side saying that they would expect these harsher penalties to be a deterrent. That hasn't always been the attitude of the Government about harsher penalties but certainly we would hope that harsher penalties would be a deterrent for those committing crimes and especially crimes like this.So we are mindful of the need for this legislation. We are mindful though that it is only part of the task. As Karen Chhour and Vanushi Walters talked about it's the implementation it's the how this is going to happen for young people. So that education component will be incredibly important that asking the question of our young people will be incredibly important because quite frankly having it written on a piece of paper isn't going to necessarily mean that young people know how to report this happening—they won't know how to deal with it if they think it's happening they won't know how to get over the sense of shame or the issues around it if they have been caught up in this kind of behaviour.So we are pleased to be supporting it but like others we note that there will be work to be done afterwards. So we commend the bill to the House. Thank you.
McKee Nicole; Rurawhe AdrianNICOLE McKEE (ACT): Point of order Mr Speaker. Thank you Mr Speaker. I raise a point of order in regard to the Hon Willie Jackson's speech that he did at speech four. A point of order was raised by my colleague who actually referred to the Hon Willie Jackson's speech where he did refer to David Seymour not being in this House. He actually said that David Seymour should be ashamed and that that's why he's not in this House. When the point of order was given you added to the point of order about the Rt Hon Prime Minister's name. However the point of order regarding the member referring to another member who is not in the House was not addressed and it would appear that it has been ignored. SPEAKER: That is incorrect. I ruled on it and the ruling stands.
Petitions Papers Select Committee Reports and Introduction of Bills
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 3 to Minister 4 April
Karakia/Prayers
Rurawhe AdrianPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: No petitions have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. No papers have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Governance and Administration Committee on the Severe Weather Emergency Recovery Legislation Billreport of the Health Committee on the petitions of Blair Viningreport of the Petitions Committee on the petition of Wendy Baker.SPEAKER: The bill is set down for second reading. No bills have been introduced.
Parker DavidAMENDED ANSWERS TO ORAL QUESTIONSQuestion No. 3 to Minister 4 AprilHon DAVID PARKER (Attorney-General): Point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to correct an answer to a supplementary question to oral question No. 3 yesterday. SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. Hon DAVID PARKER: Yesterday in response to a question from the Hon Eugenie Sage I said that the member when she was Minister of Conservation approved of the Sea Change proposals which did have the continuation of trawl corridors". Although the member in her former role as Minister of Conservation was involved in the development of the Government's response to Sea Change she was not the Minister at the time that the response was approved by Cabinet. I apologise to the member in the House for that error."
SpeechWEDNESDAY 5 APRIL 2023The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSHon JACQUI DEAN (Assistant Speaker): Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom justice mercy and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Thursday 11 May 2023 - Volume 767
Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 73New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Whaitiri; Kerekere.Noes 40New Zealand National 30; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Worker Protection (Migrant and Other Employees) Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 73New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere; Whaitiri.Noes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
Worker Protection (Migrant and Other Employees) Bill — Second Reading
12. Question No. 12—Disability IssuesANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour) to the Minister for Disability IssuesQuestion No. 12—Disability IssuesSPEAKER: Members we now come to question No. 12 and I'll invite our New Zealand Sign Language interpreter to come to the Table.12. ANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour) to the Minister for Disability Issues: What recent announcements has she made about New Zealand Sign Language?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Minister for Disability Issues): [In New Zealand Sign Language: Thank you Mr Speaker. On Monday I launched New Zealand Sign Language Week. The theme of that week is 'Together we can make New Zealand Sign Language thrive.' I also announced that the Government had agreed to make improvements and amendments to the New Zealand Sign Language Act to protect an official language of New Zealand Aotearoa. Thank you."]Angie Warren-Clark: How were Deaf New Zealanders involved in the consultation for the changes to the New Zealand Sign Language Act?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: The consultation was done through a New Zealand Sign Language - first approach allowing the Deaf community to participate in a process led in their language. We heard how important it was to strengthen the role of Deaf leadership to hold Government agencies to account for action and recognise the identity and culture of Turi Māori or Māori Deaf and these are the changes we intend to make to the Act.Angie Warren-Clark: What other support does the Government give to New Zealand Sign Language?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: The Government continually supports community-led initiatives like the New Zealand Sign Language Week the New Zealand Sign Language Dictionary and New Zealand Sign Language youth events that promote and maintain New Zealand Sign Language in New Zealand. These initiatives take place across the country throughout the year and are successful existing examples of promotion of the language.Angie Warren-Clark: How can Kiwis get involved in New Zealand Sign Language Week?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: New Zealand Sign Language is for everyone. Starting is as simple as learning to fingerspell your name or introduce yourself. This week is the perfect opportunity to learn your first signs and for members across this House Deaf Aotearoa have a leaders' challenge that I encourage all to participate in. Thank you."
8. Question No. 8—JusticeTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister of JusticeQuestion No. 8—Justice8. TANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister of Justice: What announcements has she made about trading hours for licensed premises during the men's Rugby World Cup?Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN (Minister of Justice): Yesterday I announced that the Government would amend the law to ensure licensed premises can stay open during the men's Rugby World Cup matches later this year ensuring a much-needed boost for the hospitality sector. The men's Rugby World Cup is one of the most significant events on the rugby calendar for fans and coming together with family friends and the community to watch matches live is a special part of being a New Zealander. A bill will be soon introduced to Parliament which will be progressed in time for the commencement of the tournament in September 2023.Tangi Utikere: Why were these changes necessary?Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: The men's Rugby World Cup 2023 is being hosted in France and the time zone variation means that many of the games will be broadcast live outside of the usual trading hours for licensed premises in New Zealand. Similar to the changes made in 2015 and 2019 the amendments will allow eligible licensed premises to open over the course of the tournament for the purpose of televising live games. The amendments will provide the flexibility and certainty the hospitality sector needs to plan for this busy period of time.Tangi Utikere: What safeguards will be included in these changes?Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: The extended trading hours will be treated as the usual permitted trading hours under the Act and licence holders will be required to comply with existing controls in the regulatory regime. Based on experience and feedback from police and other stakeholders this year's amendments will also include additional provisions to enhance police's ability to allocate resources. Licensed premises will be required to notify police and local councils of their intention to televise matches outside of normal trading hours and provide details of a noise-management plan.Tangi Utikere: What matches affected by these amendments is the Minister most looking forward to?Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: A wide range of matches—firstly the opening match of the tournament at 7.15 a.m. on Saturday 9 September New Zealand time between the All Blacks and France at the Stade de France in Paris. It will be an absolute cracker. And of course quarter-final No. 4 at 8 a.m. on Monday 16 October in which the nation can collectively back the boys in black as winners of Pool A while continuing their celebrations of the return of the sixth Labour Government in the general election held two days previously. Up the All Blacks!
2. Question No. 2—HousingRACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson) to the Minister of HousingQuestion No. 2—Housing2. RACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson) to the Minister of Housing: How is the Government working with the community housing sector to increase the supply of public homes? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): This Government is committed to working with the community housing providers—or CHPs as they are known—to ensure there is a sustained provision of affordable and decent housing. The delivery of CHPs complements Kāinga Ora's strong delivery of public housing. Our commitment to CHPs' role in the crucial provision of public and transitional housing is demonstrated by the numbers. Funding for the community housing providers increased from $95 million in 2016-17 to $535 million in 2021-22. This has meant an increase in CHP places from fewer than 5000 public houses in October 2017 to 12175 places as of March 2023. That's an increase of over 7000 places since we came into Government. Rachel Boyack: What progress have we seen with community housing provider public homes in Northland? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: In October 2017 there was one public housing place run by community housing providers in Northland but our Government has had a strong delivery pipeline for this region and I'm pleased to report that CHPs in Northland are now running 160 public housing places because of the actions of our Government. Rachel Boyack: What about community housing provider places on the East Coast? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: On the East Coast of the North Island there were fewer than 40 community housing provider public housing places in October 2017. Increased rental support through income-related rent subsidy funding in successive Budgets under this Government have meant that CHPs have been able to increase the number of places by over 120 on the East Coast. Rachel Boyack: What progress has been made with community housing provider places in Canterbury? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I'm pleased you asked about Canterbury. In Canterbury there were 569 CHP public housing places in October 2017. Under this Government we've seen an increase to 1702 public housing places—that's a 263 percent increase.
Forests (Legal Harvest Assurance) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
Leary IngridINGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri): I think what we've been listening to this afternoon from the National Party is a whole lot of denial. There's denial that there is a problem in the ACC when everybody knows that there is a problem there's a denial that Māori face inequity and what's most worrying is there is a denial that evidence-based research makes for good policy and that's really worrying. It sounds like their solution is to sit around maybe have a chat think up some policy but not to look at the evidence base for it and require the rigour and the discipline of getting the data that is needed to make meaningful change. So ACC is problematic. There are inequities and I would refer to an article in the New Zealand Medical Journal injuries"—I'm sorry the heading is slightly cut off but it's "injuries differ between Māori and non-Māori? Findings from a cohort study of injured New Zealanders". There's some really good research that's been done by a number of experts and I won't read all their names but what that research found was that Māori are more likely to experience serious injury less likely to lodge claims for serious injuries and—most worryingly—be less likely to be referred. I think that third pillar of it is something that is deeply worrying because this is people having their fate put in trusted medical practitioners. If there are reasons why significant anomalies exist in the referral rates then that certainly is information that we need to have. The researchers in that article have suggested a number of systemic issues which we know exist across the health system including lower rates of Māori access to quality healthcare; the treatment costs; the ability to get transport to seek treatment; other disparities including the ability to get childcare or sick leave; sometimes poor communication; or limited culturally safe practice which means that it has a knock-on effect of reducing access.Most compelling in this report is a finding by the researchers. They say—and I quote—"it is imperative to establish routine systems for collecting data about needs treatment pathways and outcomes." It is imperative they say and it needs to be routine. The best place to require that is in legislation because this is about governance. It is about having a statutory and a mandatory requirement to get the data that is needed so that the agency that doesn't know what it doesn't know is required to get that information. That is how we will put sunlight on to this. That is how we will get the information that we need to ensure that the system that is there for all New Zealander is in fact providing that. It's very clear from the evidence so far that it is not. There is a clear problem. I am deeply worried by the denial that has come from the Opposition on this bill. I commend it to the House."
SpeechANAHILA KANONGATA'A (Labour): Noa'ia e te Mana Whakawā. Always an honour and a privilege to stand and make a contribution in this House especially this one—Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill.Before I continue I just want to acknowledge that I've just come back from my cousin's big farewell. May she rest in peace—Lu'isa Mapili Halasili. And yeah life is too short for disparities.So these changes live up to the Government's pre-election commitment to return ACC to its original purpose of assisting all New Zealanders who have had an injury. This will amend the Accident Compensation Act 2001.As we've heard from members of this select committee the Minister had asked for reports from ACC that he requested last year. What evidence showed is that there are disparities in the access to the scheme by Māori by Pacific by the ethnic groups by disabled by young people by our senior citizens.I want to say this again: the purpose of this bill is to improve the focus and the understanding of how people with personal injuries are accessing ACC; to improve increased transparency of access including disparities in access for Māori Pacific older people disabled communities our ethnic communities—basically our groups that actually need to have access increased for them.I started by saying that these changes live up to the Government's pre-election commitment to return ACC to its original purpose of assisting all New Zealanders and I commend this bill to the House. Mālō.
Bennett GlenGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth): Thank you so much for that the previous speaker Tama Potaka who read their speech so well—with little conviction though sadly. I'm not sure if there was much belief behind it but a good reader none the less—none the less!For this piece of legislation it is around disparities across ACC and disparities across the scheme particularly for Māori particularly for our Pacific community particularly for people with disabilities our ethnic community children and youth. Hence why we're here this afternoon on this side of the House passionately supporting something that is actually going to bring about change as opposed to the negativity and criticising just for the sake of criticising.I won't talk about cactus today as I did yesterday but I want to move on and just talk about this ACC. This is a world-leading scheme that we've had for many many years and we need to continue to hone it and make it actually work correctly. That's why we're here today looking at the Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill.I believe that most things that have been said on this side of the House have mostly been said so I think I'll call it quits right there and commend this bill to the House.
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Madam Speaker. I have always felt that our ACC system is a powerful statement about who we've decided we are to each other. It's a fundamental part of our ethical architecture and because of that it has to be fair. And that is what this bill is all about. The ACC system we have now arose from the 1967 Woodhouse report which was a report that resulted from a group chaired by Sir Owen Woodhouse. When he spoke of the system he said Injury arising from accident demands an attack on three fronts. The most important is obviously prevention. [The] next in importance is the obligation to rehabilitate the injured. Thirdly there is a duty to compensate them for their losses." If prevention is the most important principle then you want to know who is accessing the system and how they're accessing the system. You want to inquire whether a population grouping is accessing the system more than the percentage that they are of our demographics or considerably less than. So I believe that there is a strong argument that we should be including this in legislation. I don't think any parties around the table believe that we shouldn't have this information in front of us. The National Party colleagues are really arguing that it shouldn't be within legislation. However I would argue that there are plenty of examples where we as a Parliament require reporting and data collection. The Data and Statistics Act 2022 is a great example of this almost in its entirety as is the Public Finance Act 1989 which requires a significant amount of reporting. I would say that it's not unusual for us to be requesting this whatsoever. I do believe that this is a sound piece of legislation and I commend it to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Poto Williams): I understand this is a split call. I call Tama Potaka—five minutes."
SpeechTONI SEVERIN (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I stand on behalf of the ACT Party on the Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. I wasn't privy to be able to sit on the select committee to hear the hearings which had nine submitters and 15 individuals that submitted. However most of the submitters recommended that our other population groups be named.So the ACT Party supports the aim of the bill to provide quicker access to the accident compensation system and the collecting and reporting of data on population groups so that there is equality for all to access the ACC system. The ACT Party recognises the importance of improving the access to ACC system for individuals—partly those who are on that lower-income system—and so we are now bringing it back down from six weeks.However we cannot support this bill in its current form primarily because it creates a double standard by specifying a data collection reporting requirement for Māori above all other population groups. We are concerned about the high numbers of Māori and the accessibility of the ACC system for them. However every New Zealander is inherently equal in society and we found it inconsistent and unfair to single out that one group above the others. Most of the submissions in the select committee as I said before suggested that we name the groups—and once we'd named those groups we could put other identified groups at the end. Now these identified groups that ACC have mentioned that we need data on is a very huge range which fits into all of New Zealand. We find that we don't have enough reporting on women Pasifika other ethnic groups refugees asylum seekers people who identify as LGBTQIA+ people with disabilities and young and old people. This singling out of one population group undermines our principle of equality and we cannot support it.Government advisers have noted that the regulations would limit the ability to adapt data collection and reporting in the future and this could create unintended consequences hindering the provision of healthcare for the future. However if we named the groups that we know are not getting equality within the ACC system—they should be named all of them and we can put that proviso at the end in terms of other identified groups that we are unsure of at this stage.In conclusion the ACT Party supports the idea as we said about compensation for those who cannot continue working due to injury. The ACT Party also supports collecting and reporting data on accessing the system so that we can see where there are inadequacies in our system in order to make sure it is fair for all New Zealanders. However we cannot support this bill. It is a double standards" approach to only specify data collection reporting required for Māori and other identifying groups—for me as a woman who is on that list and who says we don't access it enough it is disgraceful. We believe that all New Zealanders deserve equality and this bill undermines this principle. ACT opposes this bill."
SpeechANGELA ROBERTS (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. I just want to reassure the previous speaker Andrew Bayly that actually this bill the Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill is about improving access for everybody. I'm really really pleased to be taking a call because this bill does deliver returning ACC to its original purpose of assisting all New Zealanders—all New Zealanders—who have had an injury. There are two main ways that we're seeing that happen in this bill: one we've talked about—the data—and I might get on to that in a moment but I really want to talk about the fact that we are restoring access.In 2010 the previous Government made changes to ACC to lower scheme costs by restricting access to cover and entitlements. We are restoring ACC and improving access. The previous speaker was concerned about our intent and our ability and our actions around making sure that more people in this country get what they need to become healthy after an accident and we are doing that. One of those when we bring forward the eligibility for the minimum rate of weekly compensation for people who worked full-time at the time of their incapacity is a restoration. We get challenged that we're not doing enough. We are taking action. This Government is a Government that does things. We don't complain; we take action and I'm really really proud to be able to say that we've done that.The data is important. It isn't about the politics—which Government took something away or didn't do something. I think that was a really great example of why we need to lock it into law: so it doesn't become something that is at the whim of politicians but enables those of us who love statistics. It gives us longitudinal data rich data to make sure that what are doing is effective. That is why I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechIBRAHIM OMER (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to take a call on the Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. I just want to mention that the Hon Michael Woodhouse said that this bill is a well-meaning waste of time"; a well-meaning bill cannot be a waste of time.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Yes it can.IBRAHIM OMER: No it can't—no it can't be. This bill simply amends the purpose of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 to help people with personal injuries including those who have not yet made a claim to access and benefit from the accident compensation scheme. The bill as introduced would require ACC to monitor access to the accident compensation scheme by Māori and other population groups. I say by Māori because Māori are specified in the bill to reflect the Crown's obligation to Māori as partners under the Treaty of Waitangi.Toni Severin: What about the other identified groups?IBRAHIM OMER: The other groups are mentioned as well. This is another step towards our manifesto—for us simply this is another step towards our manifesto commitment to return ACC to its original purpose of assisting all New Zealanders who have had an injury. The Government is laying the foundation for a better future by improving equity and helping outcomes for all New Zealanders through amending ACC legislation including taking the steps to modernise ACC and make support more accessible to New Zealanders who need it. This bill seeks to bring forward the eligibility for the minimum rate of weekly compensation from six weeks' to one week's incapacity.We received about 15 submissions from 15 people—individuals and organisations; we heard from nine oral submitters. I'd like to thank the people everyone who submitted to our select committee. I happened to be a member of the Education and Workforce Committee that oversaw this bill. Even though we disagreed with other political parties in views I'd like to thank them for their hard work and collegiality and respect—because sometimes we can disagree but we can disagree respectfully so that occurred in our committee. I would like to thank the members who were members of our committee.This bill is a good bill. It's going to make a difference in a lot of people's lives. Regardless of how the Opposition try to portray it it's a good bill and I commend it to the House."
White HelenHELEN WHITE (Labour): I've had a week of actually reflecting on some of the experience I had as an employment lawyer and in this particular space I think I can add value. One of the early cases that I had that really shocked me was some workers at a restaurant called Oh! Calcutta. That is not a very small chain but actually I would say it was a problem that we had in Indian restaurants that was quite widespread. It wasn't helped by the fact that so many of those businesses were fledgling businesses and they were small so it was very hard for an inspector to get around them all. But it was also important that they had rigour around them that they were expected to keep their wage and time records in order etc. What these immigration powers and these powers will do in terms of these desktop people is they will allow people to go and have a look at the records of such restaurants. And I just want to explain what it was like for those workers. I'll just explain what happened. What happened was that those workers were working 92½ hours a week. They were working lunch and dinner and they were also living upstairs. The employer had their passports—Erica Stanford: That's why you need someone to go in.HELEN WHITE: —and absolutely Erica Stanford people can go in but we need this to be systemic across the board. We do not turn a blind eye to any business. This is going to allow people to shine a light on what's going on and it's going to set an expectation. We have had an experience of an economy that's been built on exploitation of overseas workers and we have to change that systemically. This is a tool in the tool box. It won't solve everything but it's a damn good start. And those workers who were working 92½ hours a week and were being paid $350 even though they had a contract which said that they were to be paid $450 and were not paid overtime because there was no agreement—those workers will be better off and that is a good thing. And there won't be just one worker; there'll be a lot of workers in that. We are resetting the standard here. We are saying it is not acceptable. We are going to have a more nuanced system. We are going to have many tools in the tool box. This bill is good because it is providing some of those tools. I commend the bill to the House.
Sosene Lemauga LydiaLEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour): Noa'ia Mr Speaker. I rise to make a short contribution to the second reading of this bill the Worker Protection (Migrant and other Employees) Bill. I do want to thank the Education and Workforce Committee for this bill as I have recently joined the select committee. The bill sets out a number of recommendations and the policy intent of this bill is to allow regulate create update and enable the required conditions as listed. It is really important because migrant workers who we need in this country have helped us particularly pre- and during COVID and also post-COVID and employers are getting these people as workforce. The bill sets out to improve the compliance and enforcement legislation because it is required to deter employers that they need to follow the law in its practicability and workability. Just quickly in my previous role I was an immigration specialist through an MP's and Minister's office. It was really important that applicants—members of our community—would find themselves in really difficult situations when an employer set out to employ them under working conditions but did not carry that out as they had said and exploited these workers. Applicants who relied on a respectful and fair decision-making—their personal situation was sometimes really contested and so communities would approach MPs' offices for confidential and important advice. The migrant workers would share confidential information and were quite fearful. Being in New Zealand they wanted to be obligated to do the right thing because they came here and they were invited here by other family members. So on that if our employers are going to employ migrant workers—who add so much value to our society—that is what is required. So there being a problem in our society it needs to be rectified. On that note I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
SpeechANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): [In New Zealand Sign Language: Thank you Mr Speaker."] I got it right that time. Look it comes as a great surprise—nevertheless a great pleasure—to be speaking today on the Worker Protection (Migrant and Other Employees) Bill. It is a bill that I have not sat in on in select committee; nevertheless it is an extremely important bill for the community that I currently live in the Bay of Plenty. As we will all know the Bay of Plenty has many migrant workers particularly during the kiwifruit and harvesting seasons that we have operating in our community. So it is a pleasure to stand and speak to this bill.I understand that the bill amends the Immigration Act the Employment Relations Act and the Companies Act in order to better support our fit for purpose delivery of services and also an offence and penalty regime.I think it's really important that we acknowledge that sure people sitting at a desk requesting documentation may seem to be a somewhat weak suggestion from the Opposition. We can understand what they're saying. Nevertheless what I know is the records that these employers are required to provide enforce and force people to actually go about taking care of their workers. We know that when a worker is paid cash under the table they're exploited. They're often not paid what they're entitled to. We see that in our community of the Bay of Plenty quite often. Therefore I think it is actually quite a powerful tool to be able to require employers to furnish these records. It also gives the opportunity if they don't do so within 10 days that there is a penalty applied. Further it also gives that if an employer continues to do this they also may be unable to be an employer under these regimes.So as I say this is not a bill that I have sat in on. It is an important bill to ensure that the workers that come to this country are protected. I therefore commend it to the House."
Rurawhe AdrianWORKER PROTECTION (MIGRANT AND OTHER EMPLOYEES) BILLSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 9 May.SPEAKER: Members when we last considered the Worker Protection (Migrant and Other Employees) Bill we had completed call No. 8. We come to call No. 9 which is a split call. I call the Hon Scott Simpson.
Prayers/Karakia
Rurawhe AdrianPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: A petition has been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.CLERK: Petition of Anthony Gore requesting that the House increase benefits by 20 or 30 percent.SPEAKER: That petition stands referred to the Petitions Committee. A paper has been delivered for presentation.CLERK: 2021-22 annual report of Waitematā District Health Board (DHB). SPEAKER: That paper is published under the authority of the House. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee on the 2021-22 annual review of Research and Education Advanced Network New Zealand Limitedreports of the Health Committee on the 2021-22 annual reviews of the Capital and Coast DHB Health and Disability Commissioner MidCentral DHB New Zealand Blood Service Tairāwhiti DHB the Waikato DHB and the West Coast DHB and on the petition of Amy Skipper.SPEAKER: The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of a bill.CLERK: Family Proceedings (Dissolution for Family Violence) Amendment Bill introduction.SPEAKER: That bill is set down for first reading.
Robertson GrantBUSINESS STATEMENTHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Leader of the House): Thursday 18 May is Budget day. As Minister of Finance I will present the Wellbeing Budget 2023 to the House on that day. On Tuesday the annual review debate will conclude with the appearance of the Minister of Agriculture and the Appropriation (2021/22 Confirmation and Validation) Bill will complete its remaining stages.Other legislation to be considered will include the second readings of the Business Payment Practices Bill the Charities Amendment Bill and the Health and Safety at Work (Health and Safety Representatives and Committees) Amendment Bill; the committee stage of the Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill the Customs and Excise (Arrival Information) Amendment Bill the Grocery Industry Competition Bill and the Self-contained Motor Vehicles Legislation Bill; and the third reading of the Family Court (Family Court Associates) Legislation Bill.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Thank you Mr Speaker. A couple of matters. Firstly in respect of the annual review debate which we are coming to the end of and for which both the Education and Workforce Committee and the Minister of Education have been before the committee of the whole House I note with some disquiet that the annual report of Te Pūkenga a $1.2 billion part of Vote Education has still not been published. We will be encouraging the education select committee to effectively reopen the batting at the end of that annual review debate but it is very difficult for this House to scrutinise annual reviews if they haven't been tabled.Secondly it is Budget day—seven more sleeps for the Minister—next week. And so I trust that the Leader of the House will give the Business Committee next week at least some indication for planning purposes of the extent of urgency noting that Budget urgency where bills are not referred to select committees carries with it some risk that those bills that are not time-sensitive will be sent to select committees for their consideration.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Leader of the House): With respect to the first matter the member raises he's answered his own question about what he intends to do about that. With respect to the second matter I thank the member for his advice. Obviously we are a busy Government with an ambitious programme of work and we will refer back to the member as he suggests in good time before Budget day.
O'Connor GregTHURSDAY 11 MAY 2023The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSGREG O'CONNOR (Deputy Speaker): Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom justice mercy and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Wednesday 10 May 2023 - Volume 767
Prohibition on Seabed Mining Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Prohibition on Seabed Mining Legislation Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 13Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Te Paati Māori 2; Kerekere; Whaitiri.Noes 106New Zealand Labour 62; New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion not agreed to.
11. Question No. 11—Broadcasting and MediaMELISSA LEE (National) to the Minister for Broadcasting and MediaQuestion No. 11—Broadcasting and Media11. MELISSA LEE (National) to the Minister for Broadcasting and Media: Does he stand by all of the Government's statements and actions on New Zealand's broadcasting and media sector?Hon WILLIE JACKSON (Minister for Broadcasting and Media): Yes absolutely.Melissa Lee: Does the Minister agree with the comments of his Cabinet colleague the Hon Kiri Allan that There is something within the organisation that will not and has not been able to keep Māori talent and that is a question that I think deserves some deep reflection." in relation to RNZ?Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Minister Allan's comments were made in a private capacity. I won't be commenting further on that. I've said before that I'm backing RNZ to deliver for New Zealand audiences and what they do is entirely up to them. They are an independent Crown entity.Melissa Lee: Is the failure by RNZ to release the full transcript of the comments by the Hon Kiri Allan combined with the Minister's office delaying an answer to an Official Information Act request by my office a sign that "the most open the most transparent Government that New Zealand has ever had" simply cannot handle the reality that it is interfering in the future of New Zealand's public broadcasters?Hon WILLIE JACKSON: No and I support RNZ's right to make their own decisions.Melissa Lee: Does this issue and the Ombudsman's recent censure of the Minister in his Māori development portfolio that he is acting "contrary to law" mean there is a pattern of behaviour in this Government against releasing official information in the public interest?Hon WILLIE JACKSON: No and that was a stupid question.SPEAKER: I'll give the member an extra question.Melissa Lee: Thank you. Was there correspondence between his office and the office of the Hon Kiri Allan relating to the RNZ farewell transcript; if so what was the nature of this?Hon WILLIE JACKSON: No correspondence whatsoever."
9. Question No. 9—PoliceVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour) to the Minister of PoliceQuestion No. 9—Police9. VANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour) to the Minister of Police: What progress has been made on ensuring Police constabulary staff is more representative of New Zealand's population?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister of Police): I was incredibly proud to attend last week's graduation of Police Wing 365 which marks the significant milestone of 1000 policewomen added to our police service since 2017. The number of front-line women has increased almost threefold as fast as overall numbers since we came to office. This is a fantastic achievement. As well as being committed to delivering 1800 more police we've been committed to ensuring our front line is more representative of the community it serves. This has meant a total increase of 57 percent front-line women.Vanushi Walters: What other improvements have been made to ensure our front line better represents our communities?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: It's not just an increase in policewomen that is helping our front line better represent the communities they serve; there's also been significant growth in ethnic diversity in our police service as well. Since 2017 the number of sworn Māori policewomen has grown by 39 percent; Pasifika 77 percent; and the number of Asian policewomen has grown by 152 percent. Diversity on our front line is not only a nice-to-have"; it is a must. We know our communities respond better when they see themselves in their police service.Vanushi Walters: How are policewomen represented across the organisation?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: It's not just in new female recruits that are graduating that it's improving; the representation continues. There has been an increase in policewomen right across the ranks. The number of policewomen holding the rank of senior and senior sergeant is now just over 350 representing a near 50 percent increase. There's also been a doubling of policewomen holding the rank of inspector or higher and in the highest levels including the Governor-General's recent appointment last month of Tania Kura to the role of statutory deputy commissioner the highest rank ever held by a policewoman in the history of our police service.Vanushi Walters: How is the Government ensuring the police front line represents the growth in New Zealand's population?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: As well as being representative of the diversity of our communities it's also important the police service is represented by the size of our population. Our commitment to 1800 additional police officers is vital to ensure that we have a police service that is large enough and growing to keep our population safe. When we came into Government in 2017 there was one police officer for every 548 New Zealanders. Five years later we have more police in our communities and there is one police officer for every 488 New Zealanders. That's a significant improvement. More front-line capability means police have the ability to respond and to resolve crime."
3. Question No. 3—Energy and ResourcesGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Energy and ResourcesQuestion No. 3—Energy and Resources3. GLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What is the Government doing to improve the energy efficiency of New Zealand homes?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Energy and Resources): Since its launch in 2018 the Warmer Kiwi Homes programme has played a key role in our Government's action to lower power bills and make homes healthier for New Zealanders and their families. Low-income families young children and older Kiwis are especially vulnerable to the impacts of living in cold damp homes. Since coming into Government we have now completed more than 110000 installations of insulation and efficient heat sources.Glen Bennett: What has the Government's Warmer Kiwi Homes programme achieved to date?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Through more than 110000 upgrades delivered since 2018 Warmer Kiwi Homes is directly assisting households to manage cost of living pressures by offering grants of 80 percent of the cost of insulation and up to 80 percent of the cost of a heater. This made it far more affordable and accessible for homeowners to make their homes warm dry and healthy and reduce their spend on power bills. Households are not only more efficient; homeowners report an overwhelming increase in comfort and satisfaction with their homes.Glen Bennett: What energy-efficiency benefits does the Warmer Kiwi Homes programme provide?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Motu's independent review of Warmer Kiwi Homes found that the programme was delivering better outcomes with homes being on average 2 degrees Celsius warmer 89 percent of homeowners reporting less condensation on windows and around half of homeowners noticing a reduction in dampness. Not only were homes warmer and drier but they're also more energy-efficient. People and homes upgraded through the programme experienced an electricity reduction of 16 percent through the winter months supporting households to spend less on their power bills.Glen Bennett: What health benefits does the Warmer Kiwi Homes programme provide?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Warmer Kiwi Homes also improves health outcomes for New Zealanders contributing to fewer doctors visits and hospitalisations being required which research finds equates to over $15 million per year saved in avoided hospital costs.
Employment Relations (Extended Time for Personal Grievance for Sexual Harassment) Amendment Bill — Third Reading