edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Ross Jami-LeePARENTAL LEAVE AND EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION AMENDMENT BILLDischargeJAMI-LEE ROSS (Senior Whip—National): I move That the order of the day for the committee stage of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill be discharged and that the bill be referred to the Education and Workforce Committee for consideration.
Hipkins ChrisHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That when the House rises on Thursday 16 November 2017 the House adjourn until 2.00 pm on Tuesday 28 November 2017 and that the sitting pattern for the remainder of 2017 be: November 28 29 and 30; December 5 6 7 12 13 14 19 20 and 21.Motion agreed to.
Ross Jami-Lee; Mallard TrevorSITTINGS OF THE HOUSEJAMI-LEE ROSS (Senior Whip—National): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I move that the order of the day for the committee stage of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill be discharged.Mr SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. That is not order of the day No. 1. We are on another matter.
Woods MeganHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Energy and Resources): I move That this debate be now adjourned.Motion agreed to.
Mallard TrevorMr SPEAKER: Before I call Chlöe Swarbrick I do want to make it clear to members making maiden speeches later today and tomorrow that members have agreed that the waiata will be within their time for speeches. Members have agreed that. If they are going to have waiata then they must complete their speeches in time for it. I don't want to be insensitive but it's not beyond me to do so.
Macindoe Tim; Tolley AnneHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I waited until the deputy leader of the National Party had finished her speech but I noticed that when you interrupted her in order to take her to task for inappropriate language the clock on the wall didn't stop counting down. Can you just clarify: is it expected that that would happen?Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is at the Speaker's direction.
Tuesday 14 November 2017 - Volume 725
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 61New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 8; Green Party 7.Noes 57New Zealand National 56; ACT New Zealand 1.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 2 in the name of Sarah Dowie to Part 2 be agreed to.Amendment agreed to.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): The amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 3 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to Part 2 are out of order as they are inconsistent with the committee's previous decision to reject the Hon Amy Adams' amendments to Part 1.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 117New Zealand National 56; New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 8; Green Party 7.Noes 1ACT New Zealand 1.Part 2 as amended agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That progress be reported.Ayes 56New Zealand National 56.Noes 62New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 8; Green Party 7; ACT New Zealand 1.Motion not agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 61New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 8; Green Party 7.Noes 57New Zealand National 56; ACT New Zealand 1.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 2 in the name of Sarah Dowie to insert new clause 11A be agreed to.Amendment agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 3 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to Part 1 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 57New Zealand National 56; ACT New Zealand 1.Noes 61New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 8; Green Party 7.Amendments not agreed to.Part 1 as amended agreed to.
11. Prisons—Prison PopulationSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to the Minister of CorrectionsPrisons—Prison Population11. SIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to the Minister of Corrections: Does he stand by the comments reported that he is looking at ways to exit a deal under which the Government is to build a 1500 bed facility at Waikeria; if so how does he intend to accommodate the forecast increase in prisoners?Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister of Corrections): My preferred option is not to have to build more prisons. I'm aware that the previous Government had committed to the build but this Government will be looking at all the options available before making a decision.Simon O'Connor: What specific and measurable targets for prison capacity reduction has he set for the next three years given the forecast growing prison population?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Any decisions around targets will be made in due course.Simon O'Connor: In light of that answer is the Minister signalling that he will be releasing violent offenders into the community given that over 75 percent of all those in prison are there for violent offences and the Minister has been quoted as talking about reducing the prison population by 30 percent?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No that's just ridiculous.Simon O'Connor: Is the Minister saying that his previous quotes are ridiculous?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No I'm saying that the member's previous question was ridiculous.Simon O'Connor: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If quoting a member's in this case a Minister's own comments back at him are then being reflected back at the member—it seems to be an inconsistency.Mr SPEAKER: I think it probably doesn't add much to the tone of the place especially when the member's maths are being questioned like that. But I think it's not a point of order.Barbara Kuriger: What advice has he received about the impact any exit plan would have on the rural communities of Ōtorohanga and Waipā in particular related to any commitments made by the local councils to the project?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: We haven't made any decisions but when we do we'll take all of those interests into account.Barbara Kuriger: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked if the Minister had received any advice.Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No.
10. Education Minister—Free Fees for AustraliansHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of EducationEducation Minister—Free Fees for Australians10. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Education: Does he stand by all of his statements?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Yes in the context in which they were made.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he stand by his answer to my oral question last Thursday: Will Australians have access to free fees in 2018?"Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Is the Minister telling the House that in the next six weeks he will unilaterally change the trans-Tasman arrangements currently in place that treat Australians as domestic students for the purposes of fees from the time they arrive?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No.Hon Paul Goldsmith: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just need to clarify or get some—Mr SPEAKER: No no. You can't clarify anything by way of point of order.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Right. Well so under Speaker's ruling 183/5 I thought the practice was that if a Minister makes an incorrect statement to the House he has the opportunity to clear it—Mr SPEAKER: I'll just make it very clear: if a Minister makes an incorrect statement to the House he has an obligation to come back and correct it. It is not a matter to be raised by the member in the House. If the member is very concerned about it he might want to write me a note.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why did he say—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: The National Party just lost a supplementary.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why did he say Australians would have to meet a three-year residence requirement before they have access to free fees?Mr SPEAKER: I'm assuming you mean "Why did the Minister" but we'll go with that.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Yes.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Because those are the rules that already apply to the forms of student support such as access to interest-free student loans and student allowances."
9. Housing Rental—Minimum StandardsGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu) to the Minister of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHousing Rental—Minimum Standards9. GREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu) to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development: What steps has he taken to improve the quality of rental properties?Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Housing and Urban Development): I'm advised that around 1600 mainly older New Zealanders are dying prematurely each winter and around 40000 New Zealand children are hospitalised with illnesses linked to cold damp homes. The Government intends to set modern minimum standards for heating and ventilation draught stopping drainage and moisture for rental properties to help reduce the negative health effects of living in cold damp homes. Greg O'Connor: Will these measures place a burden on landlords and put up rents? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The Government will support landlords to make sure their properties are up to scratch with grants of up to $2000 per property for retrofitting and will embark on a comprehensive consultation process with landlords next year alongside other stakeholders and the public in this designing of the new standards. Many factors influence private sector rents not least supply and demand. The Government will work with landlords to ensure that providing warm dry homes is both cost-effective and practical and at the same time deals with the shocking health effects of substandard housing. Greg O'Connor: How long will it take to implement these changes? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Once the Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2) is passed there will be an 18-month period during which time the standards will be met. There will be—[Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! Continue. Hon PHIL TWYFORD: There will be an additional grace period so that landlords have the time to prepare to meet the new standards. Then every time a new tenancy turns over it must meet the standards and after five years every rental property must comply. Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does he intend to table draft regulations in advance of the consideration of the bill in the committee of the whole House as is customary when primary legislation prescribes for secondary legislation? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: No.
6. Young People—Numbers Held in Police CellsJENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister for ChildrenYoung People—Numbers Held in Police Cells6. JENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister for Children: What information has she received about the number of young people being held in police cells?Hon TRACEY MARTIN (Minister for Children): The latest reports I have seen show that the number of young people detained in police cells for more than 24 hours in the September quarter has reduced by 40 percent. While we will continue to work to reduce these numbers further it is an excellent start. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Well the member just needs to get started and then I can control the other side. So away you go.Jenny Marcroft: What factors are behind this reduction?Hon TRACEY MARTIN: Since Oranga Tamariki was created there has been an enormous amount of work to create more options for those young people on remand with both Oranga Tamariki and the police working collaboratively on this issue and I acknowledge the Hon Anne Tolley. Oranga Tamariki has opened four new community-based remand homes over the six months of its existence in recognition that keeping young people connected to their communities has the downstream effect of helping them to become more resilient and less likely to reoffend. As mentioned in the primary answer our target is to reduce the number of young people held in cells for longer than 24 hours to zero. This will take time and investment but this is an excellent beginning.
3. Superannuation Fund—Government ContributionsKIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceSuperannuation Fund—Government Contributions3. KIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: When does he plan to restart contributions to the New Zealand Super Fund?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): As indicated during the Speech from the Throne this Government intends to resume contributions to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund to help safeguard the provision of universal superannuation at age 65. These contributions will be starting in this calendar year as part of the Government's 100-day plan. This will be a welcome change after nine years of no Government contributions.Kiritapu Allan: What estimates has he received of the cost of the fund—of withholding contributions over the past nine years?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As at 30 June 2017 the Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation estimated that the fund was $21.3 billion smaller than it would otherwise have been. After allowing for borrowing costs the fund would've been $8.3 billion higher if contributions had been retained—the equivalent of $4800 per household.David Seymour: Does the Minister believe that the past performance of investment funds always guarantees their future performance?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: One can never make such guarantees but the super fund is one of the best-performing sovereign wealth funds in the world.Kiritapu Allan: Over the next three years what is the value of the contributions that the Minister proposes to make to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Government is proposing that in addition to the zero dollars that the previous administration provided for in the pre-election fiscal update we will be providing $3 billion of additional capital to be invested with the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. This Government believes that making investments for the long term is in the interests of the shared prosperity of New Zealanders.
Bridges SimonHon SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga): Simon Bridges.The CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Sorry.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Oh I'm going to start taking this personally Madam Chair! I don't think there's a Speaker in this House who's got it right so far this term. Madam Chair I was about to congratulate you but I'm not sure I want to any more but let me do it anyway. Let me say Madam Chair that it is deeply regrettable that the time when I first speak before you and I get to congratulate you is also the time when we are debating actually what is an appallingly inept inapt inelegant—The CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): I'm sorry to interrupt the member. The time has come for me to report.House resumed.The Chairperson reported progress on the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill and no progress on the Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2).Report adopted.The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.
Tolley AnneClauses 1 to 4The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): The question is that clause 1 stand part—oh sorry. We are now on clauses 1 to 4—I'm learning quickly.Hon Michael Woodhouse: And the question is that it stand part Madam Chairperson?The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): The question is that clauses 1 to 4 stand part.
Tolley Anne; Woodhouse MichaelSchedule 1The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): We come now to clause 4. The debate is on clause 4 and schedule 1. The question is that clause 4 stand part.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): We are debating the title and commencement are we not and clause 4—is it clause 4? The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Clause 4. Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: We are now on the title and commencement—Hon Member: No Part 4. Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I didn't think there was a Part 4. In fact it was introduced as clause 4. The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Are you seeking the call? Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Yes I am but I was—on the understanding that we were debating the title and commencement and schedule 1AA. If I've jumped the gun I will pause. The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): No I've got in front of me: Debate on clause 4 and schedule 1." We'll do schedule 1. Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Clause—no I won't. I'll hold my water there Madam Chair.Schedule 1 agreed to.Schedule 2 agreed to."
Smith Nick; Tolley AnneHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I move that the bill be referred and be recommitted back to the select committee so that these details that the Minister has not been able to adequately answer can be corrected.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Unfortunately I cannot accept that motion. You cannot do it in the committee stage.Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I sought specific advice from the Clerk earlier today and I was advised by the chief Clerk that actually there is a precedent that at any stage during the committee stage a member is able to move a motion without debate for a bill to be referred back to the select committee.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): The advice that I have—and my ruling is—that you cannot do it during the actual committee of the whole House. You could do it when progress has been reported back to the Speaker. That is in the Standing Orders.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Madam Chair.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Are you seeking another point of order to challenge that ruling?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): No. I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. On this very specific point—and I am happy for you to take another call—but I would request that the Clerk take advice because the very specific advice when I raised this issue with the Clerk of the House was that at any stage during the committee stage—and there was a precedent set during the course of the last Parliament where members were able to move that a bill be referred back to select committee. I checked with the Clerk as to whether that could occur. The specific advice from the Clerk was that it could occur at any stage during the committee consideration.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): So under Speaker's ruling 110/5 it states quite clearly that referring anything back to select committees is beyond the competence of the committee of the whole House. The advice that you received was that you would have to move that we report progress and then you could move that once the committee has reported back to the Speaker. But it is very clear: you cannot do that in committee. I'm sorry if you got the wrong advice. I'm sorry if you misunderstood the advice from the Clerk. However I am ruling that you cannot do it.Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): I hope it is a new one.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I'm then taking from your ruling that the correct procedure would be for me to move that the House report progress. So then if it's possible for the House to then consider my motion to refer the bill back to select committee.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): That is correct.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I move That progress be reported.
Tolley AnnePart 2 Amendments to come into force on 1 July 2020The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): We come now to the debate on Part 2 which is clauses 15 to 24 and Part 2 of schedule 2.
Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. If I may I'd like to draw your attention to the appendices—Appendix A of the Standing Orders—which say that a member is entitled to multiple speeches but not more than two consecutive speeches. It seems that the Standing Orders Committee anticipated that sometimes running two of the four calls that a member is entitled to together might actually lead to better debate. Now in the previous Parliament I often found—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): What's the point of order? Can you get to the point of order?DAVID SEYMOUR: Yeah we're getting to that. In the previous Parliament—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Could you get to it quickly please.DAVID SEYMOUR: This is as quick as you're going to get—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): This is not a speech. It's a point of order. DAVID SEYMOUR: It's not a speech; it is a point of order. I say that in the previous Parliament—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): I ask the member to give me the point of order. DAVID SEYMOUR: —the Chair often allowed a member to run two five-minute calls in the committee stage together. As far as I can tell you're not doing that and I just humbly put it to you that we'd actually get a better standard of debate if sometimes members who were developing an argument—as I was in my last call—were able to do so.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): I understand the member's point of order. However the decisions are entirely in the hands of the Chair.
Kaye Nikki; Tolley AnneHon NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central): I am pleased to take another call in the committee stage. Again I just want to acknowledge actually the comments that the Hon Judith Collins has just made. Let's remind ourselves of the fact that we are supporting this bill. Overall we think this is a good thing. We campaigned on going to 22 weeks and we are supporting this bill to take it to the two-stage process of 26 weeks.But one of the core issues on this side of the Chamber—and we've heard many arguments as to why this is too hard—is: why can't the Government support the Hon Amy Adams' amendment? I asked the question of the Minister and we heard that it was too complex. Well the message that I have back to the Minister is again that he is putting this legislation through in urgency when it doesn't kick in until July. Please—we will support taking this to select committee to work through that complexity.On this side we may be slightly simple but we cannot understand why this is complex. He hasn't explained to us the detail of that. I can say to the Minister I've been looking up other jurisdictions as to whether this is too much of a complex issue. I can see that in Nordic countries—in Sweden—this has been around for a very long time. I don't think this is going to be difficult for officials.At the very premise of this amendment by the Hon Amy Adams is actually what members opposite claim that they care about so much which is equality. You may have—and I say this as someone who's been through a pretty tough health scenario—a parent that may have post-natal depression or a situation such a caesarean or premature babies. Why wouldn't you let two parents take this leave together? We don't feel on this side that we have heard compelling arguments against that. What we've heard is that it's too complex or that certain members support it or that it was thought about previously.Well the reality is that members opposite are in Government. There is an opportunity now to not waste the House's time in the future—if what the Minister is saying is that they may look at it later—and put this through a select committee. Support the Hon Amy Adams' amendment; don't cost the taxpayer a whole lot of money.We all support on this side that valuable proposition that parents can take that leave together. I really ask the question of the Minister again because we don't feel that we've had the answers that we need. Why won't he do the right thing rather than the rushed thing? He can put this through select committee if he thinks it's too complex or just support the Hon Amy Adams' amendment. It's been around—this whole concept—in many other nations for a long period of time. It's not a complex thing; it's the right thing to do.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): I call the Hon Jan Logie.Jan Logie: I don't think so.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): No; just Jan Logie.
Kaye NikkiHon NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central): Look I'm pleased to speak on this piece of legislation the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill and on this part Part 1. The first thing I'd like to just acknowledge is the fact that it is a good thing that this legislation is going to go through this committee but some of the questions that the members on this side are asking are legitimate in terms of timing.We have previously when we were in Government extended paid parental leave from 14 to 18 weeks and this part coming back to this part of the bill is about a two-stage process to increase it to 22 weeks next year and then 26 weeks. The question that I have for Minister Lees-Galloway is one that everybody on this side of the Chamber is asking. I don't think I've actually ever in my nine years as a member of Parliament seen something quite as extraordinary as this. We've got members including Willow-Jean Prime and even Tracey Martin saying that the Hon Amy Adams' amendment is a good thing But maybe we'll look at it later." They're pushing it through in urgency but it doesn't actually kick in until 1 July. So my question—a very simple question that New Zealanders are asking members of Parliament in this committee—is: why is the Government not supporting the Hon Amy Adams' amendment tonight? It's not too late. You could put this to the select committee. This bill does not need to go through tonight. Given that you've got members such as Willow-Jean but also partners such as Tracey Martin saying this is a very good amendment why will the Government not support it?The other thing I want to acknowledge is the Hon Sarah Dowie's amendment—[Interruption] Oh sorry I've just elevated her and that is a sign of good things to come—very good things come. She's a very very good member of Parliament. It's great that the Government is supporting Sarah's amendment but just coming back to this legislation you've got a scenario whereby members of Parliament across the Chamber—and again we always said that when it was fiscally possible we would continue to extend paid parental leave. We've done it from 14 to 18 weeks. We campaigned on 22 weeks. We are here in this committee we are with you but for the core issue of a brilliant amendment by the Hon Amy Adams which is supported by members across the committee.Let's talk about the personal situations of people that may actually want to use this scenario. Potentially you've got health issues of one partner. You may have premature babies. This is all really sensible stuff and so the core question that we have for the Minister is: why? We would understand if there was some reason such as this legislation was kicking in six weeks' time but it's not. The first stage of paid parental leave doesn't kick in till next year. Why will the Government not support this amendment? I ask the question to the Minister."
Davidson MaramaMARAMA DAVIDSON (Green): Thank you very much Madam Chair. It is with huge huge pride that I stand on behalf of the Greens to show our massive support and gratitude for this bill.I'm quickly going to address the ongoing accusations in this House particularly pointed at the Green Party about the use of urgency and be very clear: this bill has been through the House and select committee twice already—twice already. It got thousands of submissions in the select committee stages with overwhelming support and so yes the Greens actually do hold strong to our principle of using urgency for special cases. It is very clear to the Green Party that this bill has been through due process and so it is a pleasure to stand and support us finally actually getting it somewhere: increasing paid parental leave to 26 weeks.This is a short call. I wanted to put on the record my personal support for this bill. I remember going right back—I think it was a good seven years ago perhaps when my youngest daughter and I were part of the fantastic community campaign 26 for Babies. I remember us all hopping on a train in Auckland mammas and babies with our big yellow T-shirts and balloons—26 for Babies—and it's quite surreal to be able to stand in this Chamber after all those years and finally arrive here finally arrive to a Government that is showing exactly how much we value supporting parenting and mothers and babies being able to stay home together. The Greens of course eventually want to aim for 13 months. This is a fantastic step in the right direction.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Order! Order! Can I just remind members that we're actually on Part 1 which is quite specific. I've let the member go on but can she bring the debate back to Part 1 which is quite a specific clause.MARAMA DAVIDSON: I appreciate that Madam Chair. Thank you very much. You're right: Part 1 is specifically where it extends the leave out to the 26 weeks and in the two phases—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): 22 weeks.MARAMA DAVIDSON: It is 22 weeks and then 26 in Part 2—my apologies. So that's the first phase of extending it out to 26: firstly I think taking it to 22 weeks in July next year.I just will finally end with having our support put on the Hansard record that that 22 weeks is absolutely important. It was having three children within three years and being in full-time paid employment myself—and this wasn't around then; those children are in primary school now—but remembering back to the incredible stress and what a massive help those extra weeks would have been.Just to close while I agree with the spirit on the face of it of the Part 1 Supplementary Order Papers particularly from Amy Adams which would make an amendment so that parents can take that leave together it is a little strange because where was that overwhelming support for extending paid parental leave in the very first place before it was vetoed?So thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to speak tonight and to show our support for increasing paid parental leave. Kia ora.
Speaker's Statements — Oral Questions—Supplementary Questions Conduct
Motions — Earthquake Kaikōura—First Anniversary
Mallard TrevorSPEAKER'S RULINGSOral Questions—ConductMr SPEAKER: We come now to questions but before I ask for the first question I want to make a small change to the way we're doing questions. Last week I advised the House how I would manage question time to ensure a freer flow of questions and answers without the Speaker being so involved. Having reflected on last Thursday's question time I intend to make a small change to assist those listening to proceedings. Once a member has asked a primary question I will now call on the Minister to answer it. The feedback I had was that members of the public listening on the radio couldn't tell who it was who was answering the questions especially when a Minister was answering on behalf of another Minister. The requirement for members not to interject during the asking of questions will apply until after I have called the Minister to answer.
Mark RonHon RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to join with the Acting Prime Minister in sending our best wishes and support to the people of Kaikōura on this the first anniversary of the 7.8 magnitude earthquake that caused such devastating damage in the region. Can I pass on our deepest condolences to the families of the two Kaikōura people who died in the quake and to the dozens who were injured and who lost their homes or had their homes severely damaged. The shock of losing a loved one living in their home is an unimaginable tragedy that none of us would ever want visited on ourselves—our deepest deepest condolences.Also I'd particularly like to send a tribute to all the first responders and emergency service personnel who were on the ground so rapidly and the countless volunteers who put their backs into assisting in whatever way they could and I especially want to mention the hundreds of volunteers that flooded into the marae to help support those people who were caught and stranded there until they could be evacuated. As the Minister of Defence I take particular pride in and wish to thank our soldiers sailors and airmen who assisted in the response and particularly those of our close military partners whose naval forces just happened to be in New Zealand to assist with the commemoration of our 75th anniversary of the Royal New Zealand Navy—how they responded and sailed south to lend assistance to the responders in situ.On a personal note I'd like to thank and pay tribute to people like David and Carol Mullany who along with their foster daughter Emily went to huge lengths to gather up hundreds and hundreds of soft toys which they then parcelled up and which we—various members of Parliament—enabled to get down to children to in some way offer some comfort to children who were distressed in a very uncertain time.The people of Kaikōura are the people who deserve all the credit in the world for their resilience their spirit and the doggedness in which they went about assisting each other and trying to rebuild and re-establish themselves. As I mentioned at the time unfortunately—well fortunately—disasters like this bring out the very best in people and we've just spoken of some of those people. But sadly it can also bring out the very worst and it was with great sadness—and I thank the former Government for organising the opportunity for Clayton Mitchell and myself to go down to Kaikōura and witness what was happening on the ground but we were saddened and disappointed to learn that there were people who were opportunists who took advantage of others' misery. We would simply from New Zealand First remind the House that there is some legislation that needs to be passed to deal with those people who seem to think that—looting people's homes and other people's properties at a time such as this is thoroughly unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of all New Zealanders.Motion agreed to.
English BillRt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition): I rise to support the motion by the Government and in particular to note the resilience of the community in Kaikōura in adapting to what were very demanding circumstances. I want to particularly acknowledge all of those workers who spent time away from their families clearing possibly the largest slips that we've seen in New Zealand—a huge task that just one year ago looked almost impossible and now it seems likely that they will hit the deadline set back then to have it open by Christmas. That has been a mighty effort—not without its tensions but it is moving to a successful conclusion.Can I also just note the resilience with which the people of the area but also the New Zealand economy adapted to the shutdown of the main arterial route from Blenheim through to Christchurch. It's amazing how the South Island continued to be served by a transport system that adapted almost immediately again handling the pressures that went with that on the inland route.Finally on the point of resilience it's great to be in a country that could write out a cheque for somewhere between $2 billion to $3 billion because the Government's balance sheet was in such good shape which meant that everyone applying their resources to repairing after the earthquake was able to get on and do it without so much concern about whether it could be afforded. Also this one-year anniversary is a time to acknowledge the local mayors there who showed outstanding leadership and also former Ministers Gerry Brownlee and Simon Bridges and local MP Stuart Smith who worked assiduously to support the community in achieving the turn-round they have.
SpeechTUESDAY 14 NOVEMBER 2017Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Karakia.MEMBERS SWORNRt Hon David Carter was presented to the Speaker took the Oath of Allegiance required by law and took his seat in the House.Hon David Parker was presented to the Speaker made the Affirmation of Allegiance required by law and took his seat in the House.
Thursday 9 November 2017 - Volume 725
12. Primary Industries Ministry—StructureHon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of AgriculturePrimary Industries Ministry—Structure12. Hon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of Agriculture: Does he stand by all of his Government's policies in relation to the primary sector?Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister of Agriculture): Yes. Hon Nathan Guy: What advice has he received on the cost of creating separate entities for forestry fisheries biosecurity and food safety? Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: I have yet to receive advice on the cost of breaking up the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) but I can assure the Minister that a greater focus on biosecurity will deliver better border protection. A greater focus on forestry will deliver greater amounts of planting of trees. A greater focus on fisheries will ensure better protection of what is one of New Zealand's greatest resources. Hon Nathan Guy: What advice does he give to exporters who are now very concerned about the uncertainty and the nervousness within MPI's 2500 staff who will now be focused more on themselves and their future than supporting the most productive part of the New Zealand economy—and that is indeed our exporters?Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Exporters at the moment are celebrating the lower dollar. I can assure that Minister—that member pardon the pun—that there will be a very strong focus through an independently focused biosecurity and food safety regime to protect the interests of those exporters—unlike the previous regime which delivered insufficient focus. We had a numerous number of incursions through biosecurity and food safety issues such as WPC80 which is still costing this country hundreds of millions of dollars.
11. Teina Pora—CompensationRAYMOND HUO (Labour) to the Minister of JusticeTeina Pora—Compensation11. RAYMOND HUO (Labour) to the Minister of Justice: What announcement has he made recently on Teina Pora's compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Justice): Yesterday I announced that Cabinet has agreed to inflation adjust Teina Pora's compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment. This means that Mr Pora will receive an additional $988099 and this brings his total compensation package to just over $3.5 million.Raymond Huo: Why did Cabinet decide to make the inflation adjustment to Teina Pora's compensation?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Teina Pora was the victim of one of New Zealand's worst miscarriages of justice. Mr Pora was wrongly imprisoned for nearly two decades. Those are decades he will never get back. It's only fair that what Mr Pora receives should reflect the magnitude of the injustice that he suffered. Cabinet agreed that inflation adjustment was the right thing to do.Raymond Huo: Why did he have to make this decision to inflation adjust Teina Pora's compensation now?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The assessor appointed by the previous Government to consider the issue of compensation recommended that the previous Government make an inflation adjustment but that Government declined to do so. The High Court subsequently confirmed that it was within the discretion of Cabinet to make an inflation adjustment and invited the Government or Cabinet to make that adjustment. The new Cabinet considered it and made the inflation adjustment.Hon Amy Adams: Why did the Minister choose the particular inflation calculation methodology that he did from the range of valid options that were available to him? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: In considering the inflation adjustment formula I as Minister took advice from Ministry of Justice officials and also from Treasury and their advice led to the inflation adjustment at the level that was subsequently agreed upon. Hon Amy Adams: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked very carefully and very directly around why one option was chosen over another. What I got from the Minister was who he took advice from but I have yet to hear from him any rationale or reasoning as to why this particular one he felt was the right one to take. Mr SPEAKER: I will invite the member to ask the question again. I invite the Minister to maybe differentiate a bit about the advice. Hon Amy Adams: Why did the Minister choose the particular inflation calculation methodology that he did from the range of valid options that were available to him?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The range of options included a measure of Consumers Price Index (CPI) less the value of alcohol and tobacco. I'm not quite sure why that was included in the range of options. The High Court was very clear that an inflation adjustment should reflect the change in purchasing power as between dollar amounts set in the year 2000 and the value of those dollar amounts in the year 2017. The only accurate measure or adjustment to make in that regard was CPI—the headline inflation figure—and that was the basis of the adjustment.
10. Overseas Ownership of New Zealand Property—Overseas Investment Act ChangesHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) to the Minister for Land InformationOverseas Ownership of New Zealand Property—Overseas Investment Act Changes10. Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) to the Minister for Land Information: Does she stand by all of the Government's policies in relation to her portfolio?Hon EUGENIE SAGE (Minister of Land Information): Yes.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Will the Government's proposed changes to the Overseas Investment Act (OIA) cause consequential changes to other New Zealand laws; if so which?Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The details of that proposal are still being developed and legislation has yet to be introduced to the House.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Will the proposed changes prevent trust constructions that allow property ownership by New Zealand - domiciled trustee companies who invest in residential property and then extend licences to occupy to beneficiaries of the trust who may also be settlors of the trust?Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The details of that proposal are still being developed and will be in legislation to be introduced to the House.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Will foreigners still be able to register trusts in New Zealand once the OIA is amended and will they have the ability to have New Zealand - domiciled trustees invest on their behalf?Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The details of the proposal are still being developed and will be in legislation to be introduced to the House.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Can the Minister tell us how far on are the proposals to have a foreign-buyer ban and what will be the time line for its introduction to the House and if it's shortly then how soon can we get the answer to these questions?Hon EUGENIE SAGE: I think there are a number of questions in there. That commitment to have a ban on foreign buyers is part of the Government's 100-day programme. The 100 days expires on 3 February so there will be significant developments before then.
7. Tertiary Education—Fees and Living CostsJO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister of EducationTertiary Education—Fees and Living Costs7. JO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What is the Government doing to reduce the cost of fees and provide more assistance with living costs for tertiary students?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): The Government will be providing one year of fees-free tertiary education from 2018 for those entering tertiary education and training for the first time and a $50 a week boost to allowances and loan entitlements which will kick in on 1 January 2018.Jo Luxton: Will these changes benefit students taking trades and other vocational courses outside of universities; and if so how?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes. It's important to remember that only around a third of students go from school into university study. The other two-thirds move into vocational programmes or forms of employment including on-job training. They will also be able to benefit from having one year's free and many of them will also be accessing the additional student support the Government will be making available.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Will Australians have access to free fees in 2018?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Any Australians as with any other residents from a different country will need to meet the three-year residence requirement. If they do that then yes they will be able to access it. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why is providing Australia with free fees a priority for limited New Zealand education resources?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The policy is being applied or implemented on exactly the same basis that every other policy regarding tertiary education student support is being applied.
4. Provincial Growth Fund—BenefitsDARROCH BALL (NZ First) to the Minister for Regional Economic DevelopmentProvincial Growth Fund—Benefits4. DARROCH BALL (NZ First) to the Minister for Regional Economic Development: What advice has he received on the benefits of the Regional Development (Provincial Growth) Fund? Hon SHANE JONES (Minister for Regional Economic Development): Given the significance of creating a billion-dollar fund the advice is voluminous. Indeed I've even had advice from members on the other side of House as to projects that the fund could be directed to in the future. Darroch Ball: What are some examples of regions that are needing urgent attention? Hon SHANE JONES: We have been made aware of a number of regions that were written off as zombie areas—zombie towns—over the last nine years: Manawatū Whanganui Tai Rāwhiti Tai Tokerau. A number of those civic leaders—and indeed certain list and constituency members from the other side of the House—are already drawing up proposals for such regions.
Mallard TrevorMr SPEAKER: The time has come that the House has agreed for there to be maiden speeches. I will remind members that maiden speeches are 15-minute speeches and the bell will ring with five minutes to go.
Hipkins Chris; Mallard TrevorBUSINESS OF THE HOUSEHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Apologies for interrupting the Clerk. I seek leave that on Thursday the 9th and Thursday the 16th of November the House adjourn at the conclusion of maiden speeches and on Tuesday the 14th and Wednesday the 15th of November the House suspend for the dinner break at the conclusion of maiden speeches.Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that? There is no objection. That will be the case. Now back to the Clerk.
SpeechSPEAKER'S RULINGSOral Questions—ConductMr SPEAKER: Before the House comes to the first question time of the 52nd Parliament I would like to make some comments on how I intend to preside over oral questions. I have circulated this to members earlier in the day.I expect primary and supplementary questions to be asked without interjection. Oral questions are an important mechanism for holding the Government to account and at a minimum the House should be able to hear the questions being asked of Ministers. Strictly speaking members are entitled to speak without interruption at all times but the House has consented to some interjection to enable members to seek information—Speaker's ruling 58/1. In my view oral questions will proceed more effectively if questions can be asked without interjection. Barrages of interjection other times including during answers to questions will continue to be out of order.Supplementary questions are given at the discretion of the Speaker—Speaker's rulings 172/1 and 172/3. In recent times the Speaker has given an indication to the parties of the way they may allocate questions. I have continued that practice and I have also indicated to the three smaller parties in the House that they are able to use their supplementaries across a week. However I do intend to use supplementary questions to encourage good behaviour from those asking and answering questions. Where no attempt is made to provide an informative reply I'm likely to award the questioner additional supplementary questions.Where questions are misused I may reduce the number of supplementary questions available that day to the offending party or I may increase the allocation to an opposing party. I aim to ensure a freer flow of questions and answers without the Speaker being so involved. I will still call on members to ask primary questions but where a Minister's asked an oral question he or she may answer immediately without waiting for a call from the Speaker. After the primary question I will simply nod to the member asking questions to indicate for them to continue with supplementaries. I will call a member only when inviting a different member to ask a supplementary question.
Hipkins Chris; Bridges SimonTHURSDAY 9 NOVEMBER 2017Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Karakia.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Next week the Address in Reply debate will continue each afternoon after questions. There will be maiden speeches each day. On Tuesday and Wednesday evenings the House will consider Government business including the remaining stages of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill. On Thursday the House will adjourn until Tuesday 28 November. Hon SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga): I was just wondering from the new Leader of the House when we can expect some real legislation. Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): There is plenty of real legislation in the pipeline. The member will just need to hold his horses a little bit longer.
Tuesday 7 November 2017 - Volume 725
Return of Writ
Commission Opening of Parliament