edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Key John: Ministerial Statements — Dairy Products Whey Protein—Contamination IncidentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKey John: Ministerial Statements — Dairy Products Whey Protein—Contamination Incident[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):I thank the other political leaders for joining with the Government in having as the No. 1 priority that the security and safety of consumers and particularly their babies is paramount. I happen to agree with other political leaders there are plenty of questions that will need to be answered and in the fullness of time we will get those answers. I am confident that the Government is putting all the resources necessary into this issue and over the next few weeks and months we will be doing everything we can to restore New Zealand’s reputation in the international market place.
Peters Winston: Ministerial Statements — Dairy Products Whey Protein—Contamination IncidentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Ministerial Statements — Dairy Products Whey Protein—Contamination Incident[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First):We thank the Prime Minister for his statement on the Fonterra contamination scare. This is surely not a time for political point-scoring and no one in New Zealand First misunderstands the gravity of this issue. This country has always had a reputation for the purity of its food and nothing must be allowed to compromise that reputation not even statements of human error. Systems are put in place to eliminate human error when the consequences of such mistakes can be so dramatic. Our prosperity as a nation depends on it. This food contamination scare reminds us of how vulnerable our economy is and how vulnerable the consumers of our products may have been.Over the coming weeks and months much investigation will go into the how and why of this contamination scare—how it happened and why it happened. That investigation must be comprehensive and thorough. But what we know already is that a critical market has been hurt as have others and second that the restoration of our product reputation will nevertheless probably result—almost inevitably result—in a price reduction for this product. We also need to do some serious thinking on the wider implications of putting excessive reliance on a handful of economic sectors and ways to reduce exposure to risk.We are also reminded in this crisis that for our society and economy to succeed the private and public sectors must work together and not just in a time of crisis. Ultimately we are after all in the same boat. No one wanted the crisis. It has had great potential to damage New Zealand’s credibility as a food source but as a nation we must use this crisis to learn and build better and safer systems to ensure it does not happen again.
Urgent Debates Declined — GCSB Review of Compliance—Investigation into Leak and Release of DataText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUrgent Debates Declined — GCSB Review of Compliance—Investigation into Leak and Release of Data[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12326. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Urgent Debates DeclinedGCSB Review of Compliance—Investigation into Leak and Release of DataMr SPEAKER: I have received letters from Dr Russel Norman and Grant Robertson seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the receipt by the Department of the PrimeMinister and Cabinet of emails between the Hon Peter Dunne and Andrea Vance and the withholding of knowledge of their receipt from the Prime Minister for weeks. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. However I have also received a letter from David Shearer seeking to debate the Government’s response toFonterra’s announcement that bacteria that could cause botulism has been found in some of its products. This too is a particular case of recent occurrence involving the administrative responsibility of the Government.Where more than one application is received that meets this test the Speaker considers the importance of the matters raised and decides which in his opinion is more important. The matter raised by Dr Norman and Mr Robertson touches on issues that may well be considered during the Privileges Committee inquiry into the use of intrusive powers within the parliamentary precinct. The report will be debated by the House in due course. There are now the avenues for which to pursue this matter and these applications are therefore declined.
Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended Answers[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12297. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Points of OrderQuestions for Oral Answer—Amended AnswersHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I now want to refer you again to Speaker’s ruling 179/3. I want to make it absolutely clear that I am not making any allegation of breach of privilege here. I am going to take the Prime Minister at his public word last week that he was wrongly advised and that the errors he made in answering questions in the House were accidents rather than anything that was deliberate. Notwithstanding that the Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings make it absolutely clear that when an error has been made in answer to an oral question there is an obligation on the Minister to correct his answer to the House. I know that you are in a somewhat uncomfortable position yourself because you are not subject to oral questions and assurances that you gave in the Committee stage are somewhat of a problem to be sorted. But the obligation of the Prime Minister is absolutely clear. He must come to the House and he must correct his answer.Mr SPEAKER: Order! In effect the member is now re-raising the same point of order a second time but reinforced with a Speaker’s ruling. My ruling still stands. It is a matter now for any Minister—or in this case the Prime Minister—to determine whether there is an answer to be corrected. If the member thinks the course of action charted by the Prime Minister or any Minister is unsatisfactory the member has alternative means to raise the matter.Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Is this a further point of order?Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Yes and it goes to what the alternative methods are. I understand—again taking the Prime Minister at his word that he was in error in thestatements he made last week—that that is not a breach of privilege. Can you inform the House whether in fact it is a matter of privilege not to do a correction in these circumstances? Is that the method you are recommending that I take up?Mr SPEAKER: No the member can decide what action he wishes to take. If he wishes to write to me to allege a breach of privilege then I would certainly have a look at that and consider it as I do any application for a breach of privilege. But I am certainly not going to rule on that matter at this time in front of the House without a formal application from the member.
Extended SittingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeExtended Sittings[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Extended SittingsHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):I moveThat the sitting of the House on Tuesday 6 August 2013 be extended from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Wednesday 7 August 2013 for consideration of the interrupted debate on the third reading of the Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) Bill the second and third readings of the Imprest Supply (Second for 2013/14) Bill the first reading of the Raukawa Claims Settlement Bill and its referral to a select committee and the first reading of the SubordinateLegislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 2) and its referral to a select committee.Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In fact I have two points of order. The first is a question as to whether this is a debatable motion.Mr SPEAKER: This is a non-debatable motion.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My second point of order goes to the order of dealing with matters in the House. It is my understanding that under Speaker’s ruling 179/3 the Prime Minister’s correction to statements he made in relation to a Fairfax journalist and communications should have occurred before this motion. It is to be done at the first opportunity. I can understand it going after the Fonterra matter because that can take even further priority but my question is why that has not been dealt with before this motion.Mr SPEAKER: That is a matter for any Minister or in this case the Prime Minister who so wishes to correct any answers.A party vote was called for on the questionThat the motion be agreed to.Ayes64New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; Independent: Dunne.Noes56New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Motion agreed to.
Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSittings of the House[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Sittings of the HouseHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):In accordance with a decision of the Business Committee I seek leave for the House to suspend for the dinner break following the maiden statement of Meka Whaitiri today.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is none.
Tisch Lindsay: Maungaharuru-Tangitū Hapū Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Maungaharuru-Tangitū Hapū Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12221. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Permission has been granted for a waiata if you wish to have a waiata.Waiata
Robertson H V Ross: Maungaharuru-Tangitū Hapū Claims Settlement Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Maungaharuru-Tangitū Hapū Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12207. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I call the Hon Shane Jones. Tēnā koe.
Lotu-Iiga Sam: Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLotu-Iiga Sam: Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12205. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie):It is a privilege to speak on this the first reading of the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill. It is a bill that will give effect to the deed of settlement that was signed by the Crown and the Tāmaki Collective. The Tāmaki-makau-rau region represents around one-quarter of all remaining settlements and it is an area of complex and overlapping claims with many shared interests. I think Ms Mahuta expressed quite clearly what are some of the issues that are pertaining to this bill. Certainly I am proud as the MP for Maungakiekie to represent a number of peoples within the Tāmaki-makau-rau area particularly in the isthmus. But I must say I do depart from my colleagues in terms of the iconic feature in Tāmaki-makau-rau. In my view it is clearly Maungakiekie. It is through no interest or bias in representing the area but it is certainly one of those iconic pieces of landscape that is recognisable to all New Zealanders.The collective approach recognises that iwi and hapū intersecting their interests would not be possible under any other approach. A number of iwi and hapū have settled their individual claims. We saw that last November with the legislation to recognise Ngāti Whātua Ōrakei who are my local iwi as well as Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara. This bill as has already been stated provides for the collective redress shared by these groups over the maunga and motu. As such it forms part of the comprehensive redress which comprises individual claimant group’s particular settlements. The vesting of those 14 maunga in the Tāmaki Collective is on the condition that they are held in trust for the common benefit of iwi hapū the Tāmaki Collective and the people of Auckland. That will be vested as a reserve and have public access—that is a critical point—and third-party interests will be protected. That is something the local people in Maungakiekie are keen to maintain and this bill certainly supports that. The bill establishes as has already been stated a co-governance regime between the Tāmaki Collective and Auckland Council with representatives from both and a temporary Crown representative for the initial establishment period.This is a bill that certainly has wide support across this House. It is a bill to be commended. I also want to acknowledge the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and the Office of Treaty Settlements for the hard work they have put in to bring this to bear. One of the consequences of this bill I think is we will see replanting on Maungakiekie which is another point I think that people—certainly in the area of Maungakiekie—look forward to. I commend this bill to the House.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Māori Affairs Committee.
Robertson H V Ross: Resource Management Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Resource Management Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12187. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): I am just trying to be fair gentlemen. I call the Hon Phil Heatley.
Robertson H V Ross: Voting — Correction—Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) BillText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Voting — Correction—Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) Bill[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12180. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Just before I call the next member can I inform the Committee that for the voting in the estimates just recently theMāori Party was recorded as three; it should have been two. So the vote has been corrected. The Ayes are 63 and the Noes are 57.
Robertson H V Ross: Resource Management Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Resource Management Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12178. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): This debate is on clauses 3 to 121 and schedules 1 and 2.
Vote: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12178. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the votes the preamble clauses 1 to 12 and schedules 1 to 7 be agreed to.Ayes63New Zealand National 59;Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Independent: Dunne.Noes57New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Votes preamble clauses 1 to 12 and schedules 1 to 7 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment presently.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 64 Noes 57.
Robertson H V Ross: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12177. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Honourable members the time for this debate has expired. Given that 8 hours were allowed there are still a number of votes that I will have to put the question on but of course there is no debate on them.The question was put that Vote Food Safety Vote Courts Vote Customs Vote Lands Vote Statistics Vote Senior Citizens Vote Women’s Affairs Vote Immigration Vote Veterans’ Affairs - Social Development Vote Revenue and VoteMāori Affairs stand part of the schedules and that the preamble clauses 1 to 12 and schedules 1 to 7 be agreed to.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12173. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National):Thank you for the opportunity to speak on Vote Energy. This Government under the able leadership of Prime Minister John Key has taken many pragmatic steps to ensure that New Zealanders remain healthy while the cost that they pay remains low. All the previous speakers from the Opposition speaking on this vote did not touch on that area which is of concern to many people. I would like to touch on the area of keeping people warmer and healthier in their homes. The Government is investing in a new 3-year insulation programme that will deliver warmer drier and healthier homes to the communities in most need. I am based in an electorate that has people of low socio-economic means living in great numbers.Budget 2013 allocates $100 million of operating funds over 3 years to the Warm Up New Zealand: Healthy Homes programme targeting low-income households for home insulation particularly those families with children and high health needs. It is expected to insulate around 46000 additional homes over the period of 3 years. The Government is investing this money which will be matched by private funders and trusts to make sure that people live in insulated homes which makes them healthier. The project is budgeted at $93 million for the upcoming financial year. Sixty percent of the funding will be provided by the Government through the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority and 40 percent will be provided by the third party groups such as iwi trusts who will determine who will receive funding.Warmer drier homes provide real benefits to New Zealanders. New Zealand is a developed country yet we still have rheumatic fever in our society. As well as the energy efficiency gains insulating homes reduces health risks such as respiratory illnesses and serious diseases like rheumatic fever. Warm Up New Zealand: Healthy Homes will help boost the health and well-being of New Zealanders living in poor households and it is part of the Government’s response to child poverty. The new programme will follow the success of the Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart scheme which has seen around 215000 homes insulated since 2009. The final $11 million of this programme is sought in this Budget. Funding expires at the end of the 2013-14 financial year which will mean that by the end of September 230000 homes will have been insulated and will benefit people.Over the past 4 years the National-led Government has changed the thinking in relation to home insulation in New Zealand. Now when people buy or rent homes they normally ask whether a house is insulated or not. That means that people are aware that insulation makes them healthier and it saves on power bills. With these words I support Vote Energy.Vote agreed to.
Roy Eric: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12167. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): Order! Your time has expired.Brendan Horan: Mr Chair—The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): Sorry?Brendan Horan: I’m trying for another call. Nobody else is calling. Surely—The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): Just wait until I check the schedule. The member has only one call by the schedule.Brendan Horan: Yes but I was taking a call from all those other people who haven’t called.The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): No. The member has only one call.Brendan Horan: Thank you.The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): Thank you.Vote agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12139. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): The question now is that Vote Defence stand part of the schedules.Hon Phil Goff: It’s the Ministry of Defence Mr Chairman is it not?The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Well it has just got “Defence” here. There is Vote Defence Force coming up though Mr Goff—there is Vote Defence and Vote Defence Force. The question therefore is that Vote Defence stand part of the schedules.Vote agreed to.
Lole-Taylor Asenati: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLole-Taylor Asenati: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12135. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Le’aufa’amulia ASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR (NZ First):To pick up from where I was last night on this particular bill—Simon O’Connor: Are your people allowed to buy a house here?Le’aufa’amuliaASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR: No not from the people whom you are buying them from. The welfare reforms now expect all people previously categorised as sickness beneficiaries sole parents and widows with no children under 14 to look for full-time employment as well. That includes the grandparents who are up to 65 years old and if Peter Dunne has it his way it will be 67.I agree that we have to be firm against those who consciously and continuously take advantage of our welfare system but I also acknowledge that things are not always black and white. This is the biggest shake-up of the welfare State since 1938 and such dramatic streamlining of the system may cause many people in genuine need to fall through the cracks. To truly progress social development it would be useful to refocus on poverty education crime family values community structure and other core issues impeding our growth as a society. It is obvious that these reforms are the Government’s way of saving a quick buck here and there without focusing on bigger problems like job creation. Indeed what is the use of forcing job seekers and the unemployed into work when we do not have enough jobs or reasonable wages?The paradox of our time under the National Government is spend more but have less. Have more but enjoy less. There are more medicines but less wellness. The Government claims to have more experts yet there are more problems. National has multiplied its possessions but reduced its values and it has no principles at all. It talks too much and listens too little.The Government seems unhappy—well should I rephrase that? The Government seems happy to push people into low-paid low-security jobs instead of encouraging decent employment and education. This means that those on welfare who are typically the most vulnerable in our society are not likely to improve their situation amid the bureaucratic harassment and social stigmatisation that now comes with it.The Government is focusing on moving people off welfare rather than on providing adequate and secure incomes for families. Other advocacy groups have raised concerns about the detrimental effects on grandparents raising their grandchildren when they are being told to find work despite their age and ignoring the valuable work that they are doing for society in saving children from broken homes and relationships.
Robertson H V Ross: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: General Debate[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12134. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! I was going to say that one offence does not make it any better if it is related. But the member is leaving the House anyway so thank you.
Henare Tau: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHenare Tau: General Debate[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TAU HENARE (National):Speaking to the point of order—[Interruption ]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! Can I just remind members that when there is a point of order on the floor it is to be heard in silence. It is to be short succinct and to the point. All members are honourable.Hon TAU HENARE: If it is good enough for a female member of the House to bring a bag into the Chamber—Hon Trevor Mallard: That’s wrong too.Le’aufa’amuliaAsenati Lole-Taylor: Maggie Barry.Hon TAU HENARE: I will not say anything more because there are too many interruptions.
Mallard Trevor: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: General Debate[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I understood that bags suitcases or other man arrangements were not allowed to be brought into the House. I notice that Tau Henare appears to be carrying a handbag. My understanding is that those things are not allowed in here even if they are brought in by boys.
Roy Eric: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: General Debate[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12131. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? There is. Leave is not granted.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12121. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that criteria. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Parata Hekia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParata Hekia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12121. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education):I seek leave to table the New Zealand Teachers Council registered teachers’ criteria.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12120. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Now would the member proceed to read his question as it is on the Order Paper.
Horan Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12120. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent):I withdraw and apologise.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12120. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Mr Horan if you made a comment that was unparliamentary would you please stand withdraw and apologise.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12119. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I apologise now to Mr Horan. The Hon Trevor Mallard.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Although it was not quite as bad as the comment earlier that reflection on a member in this House is one that I do find objectionable.Mr SPEAKER: If it was a reflection on the member himself he can ask for the comment to be withdrawn but I did not hear any interjection that I found objectionable.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: There was a most objectionable comment made about a senior member of this House by Mr Horan as a preface to his question. I think it is probably not wise to repeat it but it was certainly unparliamentary.Mr SPEAKER: My difficulty is that I did not actually hear what Mr—Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I am loath to give you advice. I think—Hon Members: Ha ha!Mr SPEAKER: I know that it is Wednesday—Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Well it might delay you giving me the job.Mr SPEAKER: Order!Hon TREVOR MALLARD: The point that I am trying to make is that the process probably should be that you ask the member whether he made an objectionable comment and if he did to withdraw and apologise.Mr SPEAKER: I have now ascertained through a lengthy point of order that the member you are talking about who made a comment is Mr Horan.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: That is right.
Horan Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12119. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent):Thank you. For the grumpy pensioner I will.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just get on and ask the question.BRENDAN HORAN: Listen closely. To the Minister for—
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12119. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the member takes delight in wasting the time of this House I will ask Brendan Horan to repeat the question as written.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12119. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. No no. There was no “1” at the end or “(SNA1)?”. He did not just forget one thing; he forgot five of them.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12119. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! It was a very long question. The member forgot to put the word “1” at the end. I find that acceptable on this occasion.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12119. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. When a question is written down it is required to be repeated or read precisely.
Goodhew Jo: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoodhew Jo: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12119. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JO GOODHEW (Associate Minister for Primary Industries)on behalf of theMinister for Primary Industries: There have been no recent studies on the spawning—
Horan Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12119. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent):What scientific studies if any were considered by his ministry about the effect of the Rena disaster on the spawning reproductive and growth cycles of snapper in the coastal waters of Tauranga Moana and the eastern Bay of Plenty prior to the release of his MPI Discussion Paper 2013/31Review of sustainability and other management controls for snapper ?
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12118. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.NICKY WAGNER (National—Christchurch Central)to theMinister for Economic Development: What support is the Government giving to attract major events to New Zealand?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development):Through the Major Events Development Fund the Government is making a significant investment to attract a number of world-class events. Yesterday for example the schedule for the Cricket World Cup 2015 was announced in Wellington and Melbourne attended by Prime Minister John Key in Wellington and Kevin Rudd in Melbourne. Fourteen host cities were announced split evenly between New Zealand and Australia with matches across New Zealand in Napier Hamilton Dunedin Nelson pool matches and a quarter final in Wellington a semi-final and an Australia - New Zealand pool match in Auckland and the opening match of the tournament scheduled for Christchurch. The Government is investing $5 million in the tournament from the Major Events Development Fund. The 1992 Cricket World Cup was successful on and off the pitch for New Zealand and we look forward to once again welcoming the world here to show off our hospitality.Nicky Wagner: What are the benefits of this and other major events to New Zealand?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well of course this particular event will bring many benefits not least the ability of New Zealanders to see their fine team coming up againstthe best in the world. As we have seen from the success of hosting the Rugby World Cup in 2011 the sorts of visitors who come to these events tend to stay on longer than the tournament itself and they spend significant amounts on travel and accommodation while they are here. Today I released the findings of an economic analysis of the Government’s investment in major events. Eighteen events funded between February 2010 and April 2012 were evaluated with the Government’s investment of $7 million collectively generating around $32 million of net benefit for this country. The evaluation shows that the Government’s investment in major events is generating substantial economic benefits—Rt Hon Winston Peters: You’re boring people.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: —for you Mr Peters growing businesses Mr Peters and delivering more and higher-paying jobs for New Zealanders.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Surely that answer—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have not called the member yet. Point of order the Rt Hon Winston Peters.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Surely that answer was far too long unless his objective was to put Mogadon out of business.Mr SPEAKER: That is not a helpful point of order either.
Key John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKey John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12114. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):Look as it has been presented to me that is the whole string but what has been redacted is private information. So my understanding is that that is the sequence of order but it is redacted in terms of information.
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12114. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have had the opportunity to review the email that the Prime Minister had to table earlier in question time and it is quite clearly part of an email string rather than the whole email string. I wonder whether the Prime Minister would table the whole email string so that we can actually see the context of it.
Ngaro Alfred: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNgaro Alfred: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12113. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.ALFRED NGARO (National)to theMinister for Social Development: What changes has the Government made to the welfare system?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development):National campaigned on welfare reform and we are delivering on those promises to New Zealanders. Our comprehensive reforms are now in place with new expectations greater obligations a much stronger work focus and an investment approach which will provide even greater flexibility in how we work with people on benefits to make a real difference for them and their families.Alfred Ngaro: What impact has National’s welfare reforms had to date?Hon PAULA BENNETT: The latest June quarter figures show that there are currently 309782 people on benefits in New Zealand a reduction of more than 10000 on welfare over the past 12 months. The largest reduction in number was those receiving the DPB at that time down more than 1500 in the quarter and down by more than 7600 over the year. We would expect to get greater results for New Zealanders and their families. Our welfare reform changes include new supports for sole parents including one-to-one support for those at risk of long-term dependence and a new work bonus for those who choose to move into work earlier than required.Te Ururoa Flavell:Tēna koe. Kia oratātou. Aside from those measures already outlined what other measures have been taken to ensure that our most vulnerablewhānau are not disadvantaged by the changes that have been made to the welfare system?Hon PAULA BENNETT: I know this was of concern to theMāori Party. They certainly raised it with me many times while we were working on this policy. As a consequence what we made sure was that anyone with a child would not be sanctioned by more than 50 percent. We also made sure that they could re-comply really simply and really easily so that we did not see people in hardship and living for a long time on what is a very small part of their benefit.Alfred Ngaro: What results has she seen from the Government’s extensive investment in teen parents?Hon PAULA BENNETT: When we came into Government New Zealand had some of the highest statistics when it came to teen pregnancy yet resources for them were limited and sporadic at best. We were determined to support these young parents and have invested a significant amount over the last five Budgets such as introducing teen parent intensive case workers supported teen housing parenting support for young fathers as well as young mothers and our new youth services. Although it is early days we have seen the teen birth rates fall for the last 3 years. At this stage we are putting it down to a more comprehensive use of the long-term-acting reversible contraception and also girls staying in school longer. The rates are the lowest they have been since 1962.
Lee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12110. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.MELISSA LEE (National)to theMinister of Housing: How many findings and recommendations did the Productivity Commission make after its 12 month inquiry into housing affordability and what conclusions did it draw?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister of Housing):The Productivity Commission made 44 findings and 33 recommendations in its in-depth study of housing costs in New Zealand. The recommendations conclude that the major issues for improving housing affordability are land supply materials costs infrastructure costs building sector productivity and compliance costs and the Government is advancing reforms in all five areas. In fact over half of the Productivity Commission’s recommendations were specifically about the issue of land supply and building regulations. The Productivity Commission considered but rejected a capital gains tax any foreign buyer controls or a massive State house building programme saying that none of them would make any difference to the affordability of houses for Kiwi families.Melissa Lee: How many submissions did the Productivity Commission receive on its issues paper and its draft report and did any of the substantive submissions raise concerns about the impact of foreign buyers on housing affordability?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The Productivity Commission’s issues paper specifically inquired into whether offshore investment had any impact on the New Zealand housing market. The issues paper resulted in 60 submissions from people around New Zealand and not one of those submissions raised the issue of overseas purchasers contributing to price increases nor in the 90 submissions that it received on the draft report was any issue raised. The report concluded that there was no evidence of foreign buyers having any impact on house prices. It did find an identifiable impact of returning New Zealanders on house prices in some markets but the last thing that members on this side of the House would want to do is stop successful Kiwis coming home.Melissa Lee: What specific actions is the Government taking to address the No. 1 concern of the Productivity Commission that planning policies like Auckland’s metropolitan urban limit is significantly impacting on house prices and what support does the Government have for these actions?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I am delighted that today the Social Services Committee has reported back the Government’s Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill which will enable before the end of this year significant new housing areas beyond Auckland’s metropolitan urban limit to be opened up for housing. I am disappointed that Opposition parties are not supporting the bill when all the evidence shows that thisis one of the most essential steps that we must take if we are going to improve access for ordinary Kiwi families to being able to afford a home.
Horan Brendan: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—EditorialText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Editorial[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12103. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table a document. To describe and put it into context it is an editorial published by Alistair Thompson a member of the press gallery of some 20 years’ standing. Although it is available to members I suggest that some ideas are so important that they should be available—Mr SPEAKER: Order! If it is a recent editorial it is available to members. They can search for it for themselves.
Voting — Correction—Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) BillText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVoting — Correction—Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) Bill[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12180. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]VotingCorrection—Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) BillThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Just before I call the next member can I inform the Committee that for the voting in the estimates just recently theMāori Party was recorded as three; it should have been two. So the vote has been corrected. The Ayes are 63 and the Noes are 57.
Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—EditorialText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — Tabling of Documents—Editorial[Sitting date: 31 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:12103. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Wednesday 31 July 2013Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Points of OrderTabling of Documents—EditorialBRENDAN HORAN (Independent):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table a document. To describe and put it into context it is an editorial published by Alistair Thompson a member of the press gallery of some 20 years’ standing. Although it is available to members I suggest that some ideas are so important that they should be available—Mr SPEAKER: Order! If it is a recent editorial it is available to members. They can search for it for themselves.
Draft transcript - Wednesday 23 October 2013Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Wednesday 23 October 2013
Robertson H V Ross: State Sector Amendment Bill Public Finance Amendment Bill (No 2) Statutes Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: State Sector Amendment Bill Public Finance Amendment Bill (No 2) Statutes Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 10 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:11960. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]State Sector Amendment BillPublic Finance Amendment Bill (No 2)The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): You are fine Mr Borrows.
Borrows Chester: State Sector Amendment Bill Public Finance Amendment Bill (No 2) Statutes Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: State Sector Amendment Bill Public Finance Amendment Bill (No 2) Statutes Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 10 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:11960. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]State Sector Amendment BillPublic Finance Amendment Bill (No 2)Hon CHESTER BORROWS (Associate Minister of Justice):I moveThat the Statutes Amendment Bill be now read a second time . I would like to extend my thanks to the Government Administration—Hon Trevor Mallard: Ah come on. Stop filibustering.Hon CHESTER BORROWS: You see there are all these things—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): That’s got you Chester.Hon CHESTER BORROWS: No it has not but I am conflicted with what I can say and what I really need to say and what I really want to say. I would like to extend my thanks to the Government Administration Committee for its thorough and careful consideration of the bill. The bill contains 169 clauses and amends 33 different Acts. It contains minor technical amendments to Acts ranging from the Accident Compensation Act 2001 to the Wine Act 2003 which the member will be pleased to note and many more in between. The bill is a good example of parliamentary parties working together. The committee carefully considered the seven submissions that were received and advice from officials and has recommended a number of amendments to the bill. The most significant recommendation is to divide the bill so that all of Part 27 is split off into a separate Unit Titles Amendment Bill. I move—sorry what do I do? I move the bill.
Smith Nick: State Sector Amendment Bill Public Finance Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Livestock Valuation Assets Expenditure and Remedial Matters) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Nick: State Sector Amendment Bill Public Finance Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Livestock Valuation Assets Expenditure and Remedial Matters) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 10 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:11960. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]State Sector Amendment BillPublic Finance Amendment Bill (No 2)Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister of Conservation):I want to make just a very short contribution to commend the Minister of Revenue and to draw the House’s attention to a very sensible amendment that has some conservation significance. This Taxation (Livestock Valuation Assets Expenditure and Remedial Matters) Bill enables us to have tax deductibility for farmers for riparian planting.As we debate in this Parliament the issues of water quality all of us know that riparian planting is an important part of it. We know that in 2007 the previous provisions of the Income Tax Act made a somewhat arbitrary distinction that if you were doing shelter belt or commercial forestry planting you could deduct expenditure in the year in which it was incurred but if you were doing it for nature conservation reasons you could not. The previous provisions of the Income Tax Act also excluded the capacity to do it for shrubs; you could do it only for forests.I think we should commend this bill to the House for this sensible conservation step which is consistent with this Government’s view of working in partnership with landowners. We are now going to allow the tax deductibility of investments in shrubs trees and riparian strips to deal with the issue of both sediment and nutrients into rivers which is something I know many members of the House believe that this country needs to do better. Here is the Government taking a sensible step forward.Bill read a third time.