O'Connor Greg; Henare Peeni; Reti ShanePart 2 Amendments to Part 4 and schedulesCHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Members we come now to Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 38 to 43 amendments to Part 4 and schedules of the principal Act and Schedules 1 and 2. The question is that Part 2 stand part.Hon PEENI HENARE (Labour): Thank you Mr Chair. For fear of the Minister and the Government thinking that our amendments were no good we continue to offer them as an olive branch to the Minister for future reference in order to make this bill and the legislation into the future even better. I want to bring the attention of the Minister to Schedule 1 New Part 2 inserted into Schedule 1" and I want to speak directly to new clause 36 in new Part 2 which is "Transfers from Māori Health Authority to Health New Zealand" and in particular if I may draw the Minister's attention to clause 36(1)(e). The Minister in a number of contributions on this bill this evening has spoken about and actually used the word "repatriation". When we're talking about the workforce that already exists within Te Aka Whai Ora the Minister's words were "repatriation".Now for some that might give a bit of comfort that they'll still have a job into the future. But the reality is when this Government is looking towards saving 6.5 percent to 7.5 percent guess whose heads are on the chopping block! What the experience is—in particular in Māori health—is that when Governments look towards austerity cuts Māori kaupapa generally are the first ones out the door or on the chopping block.So my question is very specific to the Minister with respect to his use of the word "repatriation" of these staff. I've spoken to some of those staff directly and they've spoken to me of their anxiety. The fact that they left the original status quo health sector that the Minister is supporting and taking our health system back to—they left that because they were disillusioned that it wasn't actually providing anything for Māori. Their skills weren't being utilised so they found the home at Te Aka Whai Ora and their skills were utilised to the maximum capacity.Now they're anxious and the question to the Minister is that with regard to clause 36(1)(e) "subject to subclause (4) every employee of the Māori Health Authority becomes an employee of Health New Zealand on the same terms and conditions as applied immediately before they became an employee of Health New Zealand;"—wow! I can tell the Minister that a large number of those positions that were recruited in Te Aka Whai Ora were actually quite specialist positions and do you know what? It's only fair that for a hard day's work you get a fair day's wage. Our expectation from this Minister—and I would like to hear his answer to the question—is about whether or not these staff will indeed actually be in their entirety repatriated and in particular when the Minister's own finance Minister is asking for a 6.5 to 7.5 percent cut or savings in order to pay for tax cuts. So that's a really important question and that will go some way to soothing if you will the anxieties of many of that workforce that found a home in Te Aka Whai Ora who believed in the kaupapa of Te Aka Whai Ora.The second part to that I say to the Minister is that as we look across the employees of Te Aka Whai Ora—and I know this because I was the Minister responsible for doing this—we know that there were a number of arrangements that saw some of those positions actually be part funded by Te Aka Whai Ora so that they created a substantive position there but were also part-funded by the iwi because it was important that the iwi found their voice and their particular health aspirations in Te Aka Whai Ora. So there were some really innovative I'll call it ways to make sure that those who found themselves at Te Aka Whai Ora could be used to their maximum potential. So that's a very clear question. I'm sure as I said the workforce in Te Aka Whai Ora will look to the Minister to make sure that the Minister can certainly support many of those who are anxious at this point in time.I would like to bring the Minister's attention to the same new Part 2 clause 34 where it says in there at clause 34(1) "Section 54 which requires localities to be determined takes effect on 1 July 2029."—1 July 2029. I don't have a crystal ball but 2029? That's a long way away. This Minister in this particular bill is looking towards tying the hands of a future Government to a bill that clearly Māori do not want. So my question to the Minister here is: why so far out? Why when the Minister has made it clear—and in fact the words from a number of members from the Government were saying—that tino rangatiratanga and mana motuhake are found regionally driven by iwi driven by Māori health providers locally why then does this particular Part 2 clause 34(1) which requires localities to be determined take effect on 1 July 2029? That's some way down the track and I want to hear from the Minister: is this the vision that's been asked for by this side of the House? Is this the vision that the Minister is providing us? Because if that's the case it's not flying with me and I suspect that it won't fly with Māori health providers up and down the country. The final question I have for this particular part in Schedule 1 is to the next subclause—so clause 34(2)—which says "Section 55 which requires a locality plan to be developed for each locality takes effect on 1 July 2030." Well I'm just seeking some clarity here. We've got two different dates here which seemingly talk about the same thing around localities and we've already heard this evening how important localities are to the way that we look towards devolving services commissioning for outcomes etc. So just some clarity if the Minister wouldn't mind on the two separate dates there I'm sure that will go some way to even encouraging perhaps more questions from I know myself and other members on this side of the Chamber about "OK if there's clarity there and we understand what the vision is here then how can we continue to make sure that the strategy is clear for the Māori health sector?"Just to recap that's a question relating to clause 36(1)(e) and of course clause 34(1) and (2). I look forward to hearing from the Minister on those matters.Hon Dr SHANE RETI (Minister of Health): Thank you Mr Chair. I thank the member who's just returned to seat the Hon Peeni Henare for his questions. I used the word "repatriation" because what we know from the independent report into the Māori Health Authority—2022 I think that report came out; could have been 2023 May 2023—was that there was some concerns that Māori with skills were taken from Health New Zealand and the Māori Health Authority and those from Health New Zealand and the Ministry of Health leaving them somewhat eviscerated for those skills. So when I use "repatriation" it is to return them to what was their initial home. I do take the point that maybe part of their leaving was dissatisfaction and unhappiness with—I do understand that.Clause 36(1)(e) describes what we're talking about here—clause 34(1) talks to section 54 and clause 34(2) talks to section 55. I've discussed localities at some length here tonight across Part 1 and I remain of the statements that I've made that localities are simply paused pending a view as to where they sit in a new configuration. The choosing of that date was just a placeholder date. There was nothing particularly special about that.There was one other point sorry. I meant to mention clause 36(1)(e) the transfer to the Māori Health Authority. That's consistent with the transfers Act and so is bound in the legislation of the transfers Act.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Just before I take the next speaker members should be aware that that the new system of committee—well it's not really new—is questions and answers. Now members are entitled to take five-minute calls and that will be taken into account. However the whole idea is that we get the interaction going with the Minister. So I would invite members to actually certainly take your time to ask your question but it just will assist in keeping the information flow going. Hon PEENI HENARE (Labour): Point of order Mr Chairperson. Just to seek a little bit more clarification with respect to the exchange that you're expecting. Is it your preference that upon receiving the call we indicate that we will seek to have that exchange for fear of sitting down and losing the call? CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Yeah a wise and experienced member might stand and say "I intend to ask several questions here of the member in the chair." and the Chair will then know. I do realise that there are different Chairs here and we all have our own styles but certainly while I'm in the Chair which I will be over the next day or so I leave it open to the members to conduct business that way. Hon Peeni Henare: Thank you Mr Chair. CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Is that sufficient?"