edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Rurawhe AdrianOBITUARIESPaul East CNZM KCChester Borrows QSOGeorgina Beyer MNZMSPEAKER: I regret to inform the House of the death on 27 February 2023 of the Rt Hon Paul East CNZM KC who was a National Party member representing the Rotorua electorate from 1978 to 1996 and continued to serve as a list member until 1999. During his membership of this House he was Attorney-General Leader of the House Minister of Defence and Minister of State Services.I also regret to inform the House of the death on 27 February 2023 of the Hon Chester Borrows QSO who represented the Whanganui electorate for the National Party from 2005 to 2017. During his membership of this House he chaired the Justice and Electoral Committee and was Minister for Courts Associate Minister of Justice and Associate Minister for Social Development. He was the Deputy Speaker of the House from 2014 to 2017.I further regret to inform the House of the death on 6 March 2023 of Georgina Beyer MNZM who represented the Wairarapa electorate for the Labour Party from 1999 to 2005 and continued to serve as a list member until 2007. She was New Zealand's first openly transgender member of Parliament. During her membership of this House she chaired the Social Services Committee and was a member of a number of other select committees particularly the Local Government and Environment Committee and the Law and Order Committee.I desire on behalf of the House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy with the relatives of the late former members. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect to their memory.Members stood as a mark of respect.SPEAKER: Nō reira tēnā koutou kua whakaaetia e au kia tuku atu te reo he waiata.[And so greetings to you all I give permission for a song.]Waiata
Salesa JennyTUESDAY 7 MARCH 2023The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): E te Atua kaha rawa ka tuku whakamoemiti atu mātou mō ngā karakia kua waihotia mai ki runga i a mātou. Ka waiho i ō mātou pānga whaiaro katoa ki te taha. Ka mihi mātou ki te Kīngi me te inoi atu mō te ārahitanga i roto i ō mātou whakaaroarohanga kia mōhio ai kia whakaiti ai tā mātou whakahaere i ngā take o te Whare nei mō te oranga te maungārongo me te aroha o Aotearoa. Āmene.[Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom and humility for the welfare peace and compassion of New Zealand. Amen.]
Thursday 22 September 2022 - Volume 762
Accident Compensation (Maternal Birth Injury and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Part 1
10. Question No. 10—COVID-19 ResponseTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister for COVID-19 ResponseQuestion No. 10—COVID-19 Response10. TANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: What recent announcements has the Government made regarding the COVID-19 response?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister for COVID-19 Response): Last week the Prime Minister and I announced a suite of changes to our COVID response including retiring the COVID-19 Protection Framework. New Zealanders now have two simple requirements of them: to wear a mask in healthcare settings and to isolate for seven days if they test positive for COVID-19. The health advice tells us that with the lowest cases and hospitalisations since February our population well-vaccinated expanded access to antiviral medicines New Zealand is now in a position to move forward.Tangi Utikere: Why has the Government made these changes?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: The most recent health advice tells us that with cases and hospitalisations reducing our population well-vaccinated and expanded access to antiviral medicines New Zealand can take this next step. With the tools that we now have we can manage the virus without as many requirements on individuals.Tangi Utikere: Where are masks still required to be worn?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: You're no longer required by the Government to wear a mask anywhere except in healthcare settings like hospitals GPs and aged residential care. In some places like workplaces marae or at events they may still ask you to wear a mask but that is at their discretion.Tangi Utikere: So what protections remain for vulnerable New Zealanders?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I want to acknowledge that lessening restrictions leads to concern among some disabled or immunocompromised people. But I want to reassure those people that we are making these changes because risks have reduced. We now have layers of protection in place: high vaccination rates high levels of immunity widening availability of free antiviral medicines free testing and free medical or N95 masks.Tangi Utikere: How do these changes impact our public health response?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: It's important to note that our public health response continues in the background. We continue to monitor and test waste water have capacity for genome sequencing scan the international situation and maintain a level of preparedness for new variants.Dr Gaurav Sharma: What public apology has the Minister made or is intending to make to three women who travelled to Northland last year during lockdown but were wrongly blamed for using false information to obtain permits to travel and were wrongly labelled as sex workers related to gangs?SPEAKER: In so far as it relates to the primary question and the Minister's responsibility.Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: That does not relate to the changes made in the COVID-19 response. What I can say is that where there was a situation of a lockdown in Northland it was because there was COVID-19 there.
9. Question No. 9—CorrectionsRAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Paati Māori) to the Minister of CorrectionsQuestion No. 9—Corrections9. RAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Paati Māori) to the Minister of Corrections: Does he have confidence in the Department of Corrections following a report that a policy of no face-to-face visits has now been in place for around a year and is currently impacting around 5000 inmates?Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister of Corrections): Yes I have confidence in the Department of Corrections and the assertion in the second half of the member's question is wrong. There are visits occurring in half of our prisons. Three more prisons hopefully by the end of October will be able to have face-to-face visits and the balance will when it is safe to do so.Rawiri Waititi: How can he have confidence when there are currently 1600 job vacancies across Corrections including more than 500 prison officers which has been used as an excuse to deny inmates their rights to face-to-face visits and even audiovisual links with whānau and lawyers?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Corrections and the unions have been working for some months now on a recruitment campaign. In August we had 500 applications. Our daily applications have quadrupled and we expect by the end of the year that we'll make quite some progress to fill in those gaps.Rawiri Waititi: What specific actions is he taking to ensure that the legal rights of inmates are upheld through consistent face-to-face visits and audiovisual links that actually work?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: My expectation is that Corrections will ensure that the minimum rights of prisoners are upheld.SPEAKER: Can he answer the question again.Rawiri Waititi: What specific actions is he taking to ensure the legal rights of inmates are upheld though consistent face-to-face visits and audiovisual links that actually work?SPEAKER: Yeah the beginning part hasn't been addressed—specific actions.Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Specific actions—I have specifically made it clear to Corrections that the minimum rights of prisoners are upheld.
Dairy Industry Restructuring (Fonterra Capital Restructuring) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Salesa JennyGLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth): I rise to speak for my full 10 minutes I hope! No I'm grateful to be taking a call on this and I will be very brief because I know that I am standing between people's home time on a Thursday afternoon. But I suddenly feel very powerful. Ha ha! Madam Speaker apologies. I support this legislation as does Labour. And I think the final comment that my friend from the ACT Party just made was around younger people being able to get into the industry. I know my father actually was a farmer in Waikato—John Luxton actually was his neighbour. And I know that back in the day when it was a small little farm that now it's no longer small and what was our family farm has now been bought out and bought out and bought out again. And so it's hard for young people to get into this space so I'm grateful that we can bring this to the House and I commend it to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members the House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday 27 September 2022. Ka kite anō.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 4.56 p.m.
Accident Compensation (Maternal Birth Injury and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Part 2 and Clauses 1 to 3
O'Connor Greg; Salesa JennyPart 2 Consequential amendments to regulationsCHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Members we now come to Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 18 to 21 Consequential amendments to regulations". The question is that Part 2 stand part.Part 2 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that Jan Logie's amendment to Schedule 1 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 249 be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 108New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10; Sharma.Amendment not agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that Jan Logie's amendment to Schedule 1 set out on Supplementary Order 248 be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 108New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10; Sharma.Amendment not agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that Schedule 1 stand part.Schedule 1 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that Schedule 2 stand part.Schedule 2 agreed to.Clauses 1 to 3CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Members we now come to our final debate clauses 1 to 3. This is the debate on clauses 1 to 3—"Title" "Commencement" and "Principal Act". The question is that Clause 1 stand part.Clause 1 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that clause 2 stand part.Clause 2 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that clause 3 stand part.Clause 3 agreed to.Bill to be reported with amendment.House resumed.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Madam Speaker the committee has further considered the Accident Compensation (Maternal Birth Injury and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and reports it with amendment. I move That the report be adopted.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted."
Webb Duncan; O'Connor GregDr DUNCAN WEBB (Chief Whip—Labour): I move That the question be now put.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is—Hon Michael Woodhouse: Come on Mr Chair. We haven't even spoken to the Supplementary Order Papers. Point of order.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): All those in favour—Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order Mr Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The point of order will not be on my decision to actually take a closure motion will it?Hon Michael Woodhouse: Well if we don't have a conversation the Speaker may well be recalled. And I think it'd be good to avoid that.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): We're going to actually carry on with this motion.Hon Michael Woodhouse: This is outrageous. I'm out of here. What a load of shit Greg.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): That member will stand withdraw and apologise.Hon Michael Woodhouse: No he won't.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The member will leave the Chamber.Hon Michael Woodhouse withdrew from the Chamber.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thank you Mr Chair. I take this opportunity to make a short contribution and ask a couple of queries around the Accident Compensation (Maternal Birth Injury and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. Thank you sir. I'd like to turn my attention Minister to clause 8 which is around the Personal injury caused by work-related gradual process disease or infection". It was raised early on in the earlier debates on this particular bill that that was referring to work-related injuries or illnesses that were caused by the gradual process or disease as a result of workplace exposure.Of particular interest to me at the time was the firefighters who are exposed to toxic fumes and a range of toxic fumes as a result of the work that they do going into burning buildings. On entering those burning buildings they're never quite sure about what it is they're going to be exposed to and over time unfortunately many of our firefighters do end up with cancer as a consequence of constant exposure. In fact the New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union said that cancer is the greatest killer of firefighters globally but many struggle to get it covered by ACC in New Zealand.I did take the opportunity to visit with the firefighters at their training facility in Rotorua with my friend and colleague the Hon Todd McClay and a fantastic—Hon Todd McClay: Honourable.MAUREEN PUGH: Very honourable—very honourable.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Some days.MAUREEN PUGH: Yes. And it was at that facility that it was explained to us about the constant exposure to these poisonous gases etc.Now in the bill it was considered in the beginning about exposure to these toxic fumes and gases and I just wonder why Minister it has not been specifically outlined in the bill or did the select committee give consideration to this particular workforce to include it as part of this bill as a work-related gradual process disease or infection? It seems quite clear from the research that's been done and the firefighters have even referred to the World Health Organization's research—CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Ms Pugh I've asked you to keep it narrower. We've been on firefighters now for three minutes so unless there's a specific question—MAUREEN PUGH: Yes I'm talking to the exposure over time which is the gradual process of disease and infection and this is a particular workforce that is sensitive to this part of the bill. Can the Minister give us some feedback about the conversation that may have been had in the select committee? What was the information that was used and did the consideration include that firefighters would be included in this bill and can the Minister perhaps expand on section 30 to include that particular workforce? Thank you Mr Chair."
Sepuloni CarmelHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for ACC): Thanks to the member for raising the questions around why we are having a list. I certainly have been adamant as the Minister that we want to make sure that all birthing injuries are covered. What was compelling to me were the arguments around clarity the clarity that can come with having a list. Where things are murky with any system including with ACC is that it can provide inconsistent approaches it can mean that those receiving the services are unclear of what is covered and what is not covered and it can lead to in the case of ACC unnecessary legal challenges because of the fact that there isn't the clarity that we need. So that was compelling enough for me to actually see that having the list a comprehensive list as being of value to not only the medical profession but also the women that may have an injury that needs to be covered by this legislation. And so I was swayed to be in favour of actually having a comprehensive list. What I was also very pleased with was the work of the select committee and the work they did to really flesh out what is on that list. The medical professionals themselves have largely agreed that the list that we've ended up with will provide the comprehensive cover that we are seeking. So that gives me relief and confidence that the list has been fleshed out to the extent that it could be and will provide the clarity and cover that we're all seeking. What we have done is to—you know taking into consideration that science does evolve; we could end up with more information—put a review period in here for the list and we can look at whether or not anything has changed over a three-year period. In saying that if science was to give us information earlier than the three years and something compelling came up there's nothing to stop someone making an amendment to add to that list. So I'm confident that where we have landed and by having the list in place we are actually providing the comprehensive cover the clarity and the certainty that these women need if they do end up in a position where they have an injury.
Sepuloni CarmelHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for ACC): There was a lot covered in that; I don't know if it was all completely related to Part 1. However that broader issue that the member was talking about—that certainly is a broader issue and isn't covered in the bill and isn't something that we're going to be able to resolve here. I will say that as Minister for ACC when developing this up and thinking this through and working with our officials and policy team I've also been having those conversations with the other relevant Ministers including the Minister for Women and the Associate Minister of Health who has responsibility for the Maternity Action Plan. And so we have been working together and thinking about the pressures in the workforce at the same time. It is important that those things are considerations.
Sepuloni CarmelHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for ACC): Just recognising that parts of the question or questions were asked pre - lunch break so hopefully I'm able to cover off the questions that the member has asked. The first question was: what will be the extra costs of the expansion to the range of injuries as agreed by the select committee? The select committee's refining of the list of maternal birth injuries to more accurately reflect the injuries suffered by birthing parents didn't impact the estimated costing prepared by officials. That's because the initial estimated costings were conservatively based on estimates of the prevalence of all maternal birth injuries in the general population and not costings of the specific injuries in the bill. So being more explicit about the injuries and which ones are covered doesn't necessarily mean there was an expansion. Because of the gaps in national data sets recording birth injuries officials based their costings on experts' experience of birth injury prevalence and cross-checked to international studies. As with any change to ACC cover entitlements there's no way of being absolutely sure of the exact costs given that numbers and severity of injuries can change. Once the new maternal birth injury provisions are implemented and operational ACC will then be able to build an evidence base of the types of injuries suffered and their costs.What the experts do agree on is that of the number of injuries that are experienced about 5 percent are likely to be severe injuries which is around 160 injuries per year and those more severe injuries are the ones that are likely to have the longer-term implications and therefore are likely to prevent them from being able to return to work.The other question that was asked by the member was what happens around funding for the claims that would have been treatment injuries. Treatment injuries as the member has rightly pointed out are already funded but the plan is for all obviously maternal birth injuries to be covered. And the issue in the past is that it was only when there was a treatment issue would there be cover. Regardless of whether a claim is for a treatment injury or for a maternal birth injury the funding source for the claim depends on whether the client was an earner or a non-earner. Treatment injuries are funded from earner levies of course and as the member has pointed out non-earners appropriation. Maternal birth injuries will also be funded from the earner levies or the non-earners appropriation depending as the member again pointed out on the earner status of the injured person.
SpeechHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Thank you Mr Chair. It might take me a little longer than a minute to get through the questions that I have for the Minister at the start but in any event when we did adjourn I was talking about the impact of the changes to the law on both the treatment injury account and the earners account and the non-earners account. Currently if a birthing parent suffers an injury—and that's accepted by ACC; it's considered a treatment injury and that's appropriate—the funding for that comes out of the account which is funded by the Crown. This change means that as I understand it all birthing injuries will now be allocated to either the earner account or the non-earner account depending on the employment status of the mother at the time that the injury was sustained.Now this has a couple of impacts because firstly there is a transfer of the cost from the treatment injury account to either of those other two accounts. Secondly the changes that we are making are going to significantly increase the number of claims that are being made. The select committee when considering a broadening of the definitions of birthing injury were advised in the regulatory impact statement (RIS)—no it wasn't I'm sorry; additional advice to the committee that as many as 85 percent of mums might have a valid claim for a first- or second-degree obstetric anal sphincter injury tear and further 30 percent of first-time birthing parents could have an avulsion injury. So we're now talking about if there's between 50000 and 60000 babies born every year—what's that over 40000 potential extra claims.So the question really is a pretty technical one but we didn't get the answers in the committee. I think this committee needs to know the impacts of these things. How much is currently being paid out of the treatment injury account for existing birthing injuries and what will the overall cost of new claims under the amended legislation be because in the RIS it was $25 million and clearly that's not going to be enough per year. That's at 40000-odd births; that's only about $500 per claim.Back to the issue of treatment injury if there is a medical misadventure under the old language or an error will any birthing injury ever be attributed to the treatment injury account? One of the things that the treatment injury account has done is shine a light on harm in hospitals in treatment facilities. ACC has a much better understanding than it did perhaps 15 or 20 years ago and that's important in preventing injuries. Understanding the trend of injuries then gives ACC its injury prevention team a steer about what perhaps clinical practice or clinical guidelines could be issued in order to make sure that avoidable harm in the birthing process is actually followed through. So it is important to continue to understand the distinctions between a covered injury that is avoidable from one which is not because at least then we'll be able to prevent those avoidable ones.
Rurawhe Adrian; O'Connor GregSPEAKER: I declare the House in committee for further consideration of the Accident Compensation (Maternal Birth Injury and Other Matters) Amendment Bill.ACCIDENT COMPENSATION (MATERNAL BIRTH INJURY AND OTHER MATTERS) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed from 21 September.Part 1 Amendments to principal Act (continued)CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Members the House is in committee for further consideration of the Accident Compensation (Maternal Birth Injury and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. When we were last discussing this bill the question was that Part 1 stand part. The Hon Michael Woodhouse has one minute remaining if he chooses to use it.
Standing Orders—Definition of Working Day
Hipkins Chris; Rurawhe AdrianSTANDING ORDERSDefinition of Working DayHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That Queen Elizabeth II Memorial Day is not a working day for the purposes of the Standing Orders and that the definition of working day in Standing Order 3(1) be read accordingly.On Tuesday the House passed a bill to create a one-off special public holiday on the day of the national memorial service that will mark the end of Queen Elizabeth II's 70-year reign. This motion is a consequence of the passing of that legislation. It means that within Parliament the day will be treated in the same way as every other public holiday.If we didn't pass this motion next Monday within the parliamentary precincts would still be regarded as a working day as defined by Standing Order 3. So therefore the Office of the Clerk and other agencies within the complex would have to have their people working to process things like written questions and to carry out other functions of a parliamentary working day. With the passage of this motion they will be free on that day to mark the holiday and to mark the passing of the Queen as they think appropriate as every other New Zealander will.SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Thank you Mr Speaker. On behalf of His Majesty's loyal Opposition—that's the first time I've said that and it does take a bit of getting used to—I'm very pleased to support this motion; it's necessary. The machinery of Parliament and Government does rely on the clear definition of working days because so many of the obligations for things like reporting back on reports and so on does follow that metric. And of course as the Leader of the House said the written questions process takes quite a bit of administration behind the scenes; we hit the button and off they go and we know that there's quite a bit to be done. I just want to take the opportunity to acknowledge and thank the number of hard-working staff in the Parliamentary Service and in the Clerk's Office who do us a great service and wish them a restful and happy memorial day—I say happy" in the sense that any day you're not working is probably a happier day than the alternative—and that they will reflect on the magnificent life well-lived of Her Majesty. Many of us will be at the memorial services in Wellington Auckland or around the country but for those staff however they mark that day I hope they have a good rest.Motion agreed to."
Motions — Māori Fisheries Settlement—30th Anniversary
Rurawhe AdrianPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: A petition has been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.CLERK: Petition of Puneet Saini requesting that the House inquire into whether unused and unexpired medicines can be appropriately donated or gifted for reuse.SPEAKER: That petition stands referred to the Petitions Committee. No papers have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. A select committee report has been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Education and Workforce Committee on the 2020/21 Annual Review of Te Pūkenga - New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology.SPEAKER: The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of bills.CLERK:Deposit Takers Bill introduction.Oranga Tamariki (Repeal of Section 7AA) Amendment Bill introduction.Employment Relations (Restraint of Trade) Amendment Bill introduction.Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Cellar Door Tasting) Amendment Bill introduction.SPEAKER: Those bills are set down for first reading.
Hipkins ChrisBUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Thank you Mr Speaker. Legislation to be considered next week will include: the first readings of the Charities Amendment Bill the Criminal Activity Intervention Legislation Bill the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Amendment Bill the Deposit Takers Bill and the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill; the second reading and committee stage of the Fisheries Amendment Bill; the committee stages of the Digital Identity Services Trust Framework Bill the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Hazardous Substances Assessments) Amendment Bill and the Plant Variety Rights Bill; and the third readings of the Accident Compensation (Maternal Birth Injury and Other Matters) Amendment Bill the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill and the Screen Industry Workers Bill. There will be an extended sitting on the morning of Wednesday 28 September.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Thank you Mr Speaker. I appreciate the informative and heroically ambitious list of things the Government intends to get through next week; I wish them all the best. My recollection is that the Minister for the Environment indicated that legislation to reform the Resource Management Act would be introduced by October—I presume he meant October 2022. I wonder if the Leader of the House could give an update on the likelihood that that deadline will be met.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): That actually is a question for the Minister for the Environment rather than for me as Leader of the House. I can assure the member that it will be introduced as soon as it has been approved.
Tirikatene RinoMOTIONSMāori Fisheries Settlement—30th AnniversaryRINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga): I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate on the 30th anniversary of the Māori Fisheries Settlement.SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.RINO TIRIKATENE: I move That this House note the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Māori Fisheries Settlement at Parliament on 23 September 1992; that the Sealord deal as it was coined paved the way for iwi and Māori involvement in this country's modern commercial fisheries; and that it allowed Te Ohu Kaimoana to help iwi establish administrative and management structures that have shaped iwi organisations and leadership in this modern age.Motion agreed to.
O'Connor GregTHURSDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2022The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSGREG O'CONNOR (Deputy Speaker): Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom justice mercy and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Tuesday 22 August 2023 - Volume 771
Water Services Legislation Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Water Services Legislation Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 62New Zealand Labour 62.Noes 57New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Te Paati Māori 2; Kerekere; Whaitiri.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That urgency be accorded the remaining stages of the Water Services Legislation Bill the Crown Minerals Amendment Bill the Water Services Economic Efficiency and Consumer Protection Bill the Taxation Principles Reporting Bill the Land Transport Management (Regulation of Public Transport) Amendment Bill the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill the Fuel Industry (Improving Fuel Resilience) Amendment Bill the Resale Right for Visual Artists Bill the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Community Participation) Amendment Bill the Legal Services Amendment Bill and the Land Transport (Road Safety) Amendment Bill.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Te Paati Māori 2; Kerekere; Whaitiri.Noes 44New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2023/24) Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 47New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2; Whaitiri.Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
Imprest Supply (Second for 2023/24) Bill — Third Reading
Appropriation (2023/24 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading & Imprest Supply (Second for 2023/24) Bill — Second Reading (continued)
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Appropriation (2023/24 Estimates) Bill be now read a third time and the Imprest Supply (Second for 2023/24) Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 71New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9.Noes 47New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2; Whaitiri.Motion agreed to.Appropriation (2023/24 Estimates) Bill read a third time.Imprest Supply (Second for 2023/24) Bill read a second time.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): The Imprest Supply (Second for 2023/24) Bill is set down for third reading immediately.
Imprest Supply (Second for 2023/24) Bill — Introduction & First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2023/24) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 72New Zealand Labour 62; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kerekere.Noes 47New Zealand National 34; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2; Whaitiri.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.
9. Question No. 9—HealthDr SHANE RETI (National) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 9—Health9. Dr SHANE RETI (National) to the Minister of Health: What is the latest Faster Cancer Treatment (31-day indicator) result and what current hurdles are there for improved cancer management?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): The Faster Cancer Treatment 31-day indicator is the proportion of patients who received their first cancer treatment within 31 days from the date of decision to treat. Health New Zealand's most recent clinical performance metrics for January to March 2023 is 83 percent; the target is 85 percent. I am confident performance against this metric will improve as our efforts to grow our workforce take effect. To the second part of the question a hurdle to purchasing expensive cancer treatments is when a politician promises to purchase specific medicines without allowing Pharmac to negotiate a good deal and make our dollar go further.Dr Shane Reti: Is 83 percent the worst Faster Cancer Treatment 31-day indicator in the past five years?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: It is not that different from previous performance against that indicator.Dr Shane Reti: When will the Cancer Control Agency complete the chemotherapy gap analysis with Australia for blood cancers such as myeloma and leukaemia?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: That work is under way. But speaking of the cancer agency that agency does tremendous work to define how we should better look after cancer. And it's a reminder of one of the many initiatives that this Government has brought in to improve cancer care after the previous Government disestablished the Cancer Control Council. It's also worth remembering the 10 linear accelerators our Government has built when no cancer radiation treatment and infrastructure was built under the last Government. It's worth remembering that the last Government promised to implement HPV screening something this Government has brought in. It's also worth remembering that the bowel screening—SPEAKER: It's also worth remembering this is not a speech.Dr Shane Reti: Is 83 percent the worst 31-day Faster Cancer Treatment indicator in the past five years?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I am aware that that figure has been around the target across the five years. If that member wants a more specific answer on those statistics they are welcome to put that question on notice.Dr Shane Reti: Has she asked officials to assess how many people go to Australia each year to receive cancer medicines that have significant clinical benefit that Australia funds and we do not and if so how many people is that?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: This Government has increased the budget for Pharmac considerably—by 51 percent. And it has had a tremendous impact on the treatment of cancer in New Zealand: multiple treatments for advanced non-small cell cancer for ovarian cancer for breast cancer for myeloid leukaemia for refractory follicular or marginal-zone lymphoma—the list goes on and on.
8. Question No. 8—EducationCHRIS BAILLIE (ACT) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 8—Education8. CHRIS BAILLIE (ACT) to the Minister of Education: Is she satisfied with the state of schools in New Zealand?Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Education): I am satisfied that the rapid action taken by this Government to improve attendance is working with 412 initiatives funded across 762 schools and 84 additional attendance officers in place. I am satisfied our teachers are to be well supported to teach the new maths and literacy curriculum with core teaching requirements to be legislated so it's clear what needs to be taught and when. I am satisfied that barriers to education have been removed by programmes such as free healthy school lunches free period products counselling in schools and removing school donations. Is there more work to do? Yes. But I am satisfied that under this Government schools are best placed to support learning environments for our kids to thrive.Chris Baillie: Is she aware that Melville High School in Hamilton has had to hire private security guards to ensure that everyone goes home safely at the end of the day" and if so what is the Ministry of Education doing to support schools like these?Hon JAN TINETTI: I haven't had that information come across my desk.Chris Baillie: How can the Ministry of Education begin to understand whether it is helping to improve school safety when it doesn't collect information on assaults on students or staff members even if it involves the use of weapons?Hon JAN TINETTI: The Ministry of Education went through a very big restructure last year. Te Mahau was created which is very close to schools and they have officers that work very very closely and close with those schools and know those schools and the issues that they are presented with and are supporting them.Chris Baillie: Is she aware that the number of home-school students increased from 6000 in 2017 to nearly 11000 in 2023 and does she accept that this 81 percent increase is an indication that parents are losing faith in the education system?Hon JAN TINETTI: That member will be aware that a big reason why that happened was because we had been through a pandemic. Sometimes they do forget that there has been a pandemic that has created a disruption to our school learning. What that member should also be aware of is that those home-school numbers are coming back down again because those people are re-entering school. And what is happening is that there is a growing number of them coming back into the schooling system and showing great support for the State system."
7. Question No. 7—HealthSARAH PALLETT (Labour—Ilam) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 7—Health7. SARAH PALLETT (Labour—Ilam) to the Minister of Health: What announcement has she recently made regarding free prescriptions?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): This Government is reducing the cost of healthcare for New Zealand households by removing the $5 co-payment for prescription medicines. Yesterday I was proud to announce that since the $5 co-payment has been removed over 3 million free prescriptions have helped around 900000 New Zealanders. Removing the $5 charge has made it cheaper for New Zealanders to access the medicines they need. This has had a meaningful impact for many households particularly those who have multiple prescriptions to fill on a regular basis.Sarah Pallett: What financial impact has this investment had for New Zealanders?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: The 3 million free prescriptions has put approximately $8.4 million back in the pockets of 900000 New Zealanders. Free prescriptions are part of the Government's 10 point plan to reduce the cost of living and mean people are less likely to get sick less likely to live with pain and less likely to need time off work for illness.Sarah Pallett: Why has the Government moved to improve access to medicines?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: We know the $5 charge was a barrier to some New Zealanders accessing the medicines they need. Now the 21-year-old student won't have to worry about having enough money for her contraception; a young man with epilepsy can stay in training and keep his driver's licence; the father with diabetes gets his life-saving medicine for free. Our track record is to invest in Kiwis' health.Sarah Pallett: How is this change supporting the better health of New Zealanders?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Removing the $5 prescription co-payment means we are investing in simple treatments that prevent chronic conditions becoming emergencies that need hospital treatments. We're making it easier to get blood pressure treatment so that fewer people have strokes people have access to diabetes treatment to prevent kidney failure and blindness and we are making it easier for people to get cholesterol treatment to prevent their heart attacks. Proposed changes to reinstate the payment while proposing tax cuts for millionaires are both unfair and out of touch. Labour's track record is to invest in health and that's all at risk under a National-ACT Government.SPEAKER: Order! Yeah Government cannot use patsy questions to attack the Opposition. The member will stand withdraw and apologise.Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I withdraw and apologise.Dr Shane Reti: Does she think it's appropriate that members of Parliament like me and her receive a $5 co-pay relief or would that money be better spent on cancer drugs?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: All people are entitled to medical treatment and what's more I noticed that every method that that side of the House proposes to try and target this does mean that some people will miss out. I believe in universal access to healthcare.
5. Question No. 5—EducationANGELA ROBERTS (Labour) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 5—Education5. ANGELA ROBERTS (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What action is the Government taking to ensure the teaching of maths reading and writing is consistent across the country?Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Education): The Government has announced that we will regulate core teaching requirements of maths reading and writing to guarantee foundational teaching and learning of these subjects. This is work that has long been in the pipeline having first been outlined to the sector and wider public in March last year in the Government's maths and literacy strategy. Core teaching requirements have been welcomed by the sector and experts as it will deliver clear and consistent education from Kaitāia to Invercargill. Therefore the Government has opted to embed this into legislation so that no learning is left to chance.Angela Roberts: How will parents teachers and students know whether they are progressing in the new maths and literacy curriculum?Hon JAN TINETTI: Every subject in the new curriculum will have maths and literacy progress steps to ensure maths and literacy learning is embedded and contextualised within teaching practice. Progress steps will also enable teachers to track a child's progression over their education and identify where further support may be needed to move to the next step. Parents and students will have visibility of this progression plan and have confidence that their child is well supported to progress in their maths reading and writing skills in a way that suits them.Angela Roberts: How will teachers be supported to implement the core teaching requirements?Hon JAN TINETTI: Teachers will be well supported with guidance professional development and materials to implement these changes and ensure there is consistency across all schools to give all kids equal opportunity. This prevents teachers from having to recreate the wheel every lesson. The core teaching requirements will provide clarity on what needs to be taught and when throughout the curriculum so no learning opportunities are left to chance.Angela Roberts: How are the core teaching requirements different from national standards and standardised testing?Hon JAN TINETTI: National standards were a complete and utter failure. They were neither national nor standard and taught children how to pass a test rather than progress in their education. The difference is this Government is focused on evidence-based teaching and learning. We are legislating core teaching requirements that will add to teachers' existing expertise by giving them evidence-informed practical guidance to enhance the way they teach literacy communication and maths.
1. Question No. 1—HousingANAHILA KANONGATA'A (Labour) to the Minister of HousingORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Housing1. ANAHILA KANONGATA'A (Labour) to the Minister of Housing: How is the Government's record public housing build programme supporting more people into trades training and apprenticeships? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): Our Labour Government has delivered more than 13000 new public homes in the last six years with a further 6000 new homes under construction or contracted. Our record of delivery has not only provided more homes for New Zealanders but training opportunities too. Since 2017 more than 850 people across the country have gained valuable construction skills through Kāinga Ora's apprenticeship programme which helps to reduce our skills shortages and train the next generation of our construction workforce. Anahila Kanongata'a: How are the apprenticeship programmes supporting more women Māori and Pasifika into work? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Well in order to ensure our construction sector can deliver on our Government's significant infrastructure programme we need to grow the diversity of our construction workforce. Through the Kāinga Ora apprenticeship programme we're actively seeking to recruit women Māori and Pasifika as well as Kāinga Ora tenants into apprenticeships. Over 40 percent of the over 850 apprentices to date have been Māori and Pacific and I'm delighted to say 53 of the apprentices have been women. Anahila Kanongata'a: What regions are benefiting from encouraging young people into the building and construction sector?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Kāinga Ora's partnerships with schools are helping to train the next generation of tradies all across the country. Kāinga Ora has eight partnerships with schools and polytechs and it has five more currently being worked on. Communities across New Zealand are benefiting from this programme including Dargaville Onehunga Rotorua Hastings Ōpōtiki Wellington Nelson and of course Christchurch. Anahila Kanongata'a: How will the Government's sustained and consistent investment in public housing continue to support the training of apprentices? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: In Budget 2023 we continued our Government's commitment to delivering public homes through our record build programme. This means more public homes and more apprenticeships.
McAnulty Kieran; O'Connor GregHon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister of Local Government): Mr Chair thank you very much. The definition of mana whenua" was debated in the Water Services Entities Act extensively last year and this bill refers to the definition that had already been passed.In regard to Mr Court's questions essentially the bill sets out consistent standards and the tools for entities and partners to create bespoke working arrangements for each particular area. I think that's the appropriate approach. Of course every area will be different but we want it to be consistently applied. But the bill also makes it very clear that whilst stormwater systems are complex the entities will continue to have responsibility for discharge and the majority of work.And finally to Barbara Kuriger's question around the impacts of climate change we've seen the impact recently that severe weather has had on stormwater waste water and drinking water systems. Whilst we are bringing in these reforms we felt it was only appropriate that we require the entities to take into account climate change and give them the objective to mitigate against climate change. That of course was an obligation that was provided to the entities when this was debated in 2002.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Look I'll just note—I intend to leave the Chair—that although this is wide-ranging the questions have been relatively narrow and they have actually been quite repetitive to date. That will be taken into account when we resume tomorrow. It is now time to leave the Chair. The House will be resumed at 9 a.m. tomorrow.Sitting suspended from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Wednesday)"