edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
SpeechHon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): Thanks Madam Chair. Look happy to provide a couple of responses. I do note that in a number of these areas we are not so much talking about the substance of the bill any more but what might happen as a result of the regulations which are enabled by the bill but none the less I'm happy to be as helpful as I can in that area. That applies for example to certain categories that might be excluded under the legislation. That's not actually a matter that's set out in the bill. That is something that the Minister through an Order in Council can consider. I have signalled that we'll be doing that. Certainly we're considering that subject to Cabinet decision making in respect of disability vehicles but also special interest vehicles motor sport vehicles and low-volume modified vehicles as well. They're the ones that we're considering but again that's actually about what Cabinet now or in the future might determine is appropriate.The same applies to the member's other question about the cost of the scheme. It's not actually a matter that's in the bill but the Government has provided adequate funding for the programme to move forward. The set-up costs are approximately $6 million and approximately $8 million ongoing; that's Crown funded.In respect of the member's other question about the—again these are empowering provisions I'd point out new section 167C sets up empowering provisions in the bill and does provide the ability through an Order in Council process for a minimum required number of zero-emissions vehicles to be required. So that won't happen when the legislation comes in but the Minister through an Order in Council can in the future choose to do that. We've signalled pretty openly that we don't see that happening in the short term but it's enabled under the bill. What would happen there would be that the provision would apply to the entity who is importing the vehicles as defined in the underlying legislation. And in respect of any importer who was not able to source electric vehicles it wouldn't be that they couldn't import any vehicles but a charge would apply in that instance.
Salesa JennyLAND TRANSPORT (CLEAN VEHICLES) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed from 15 February.Part 1 Amendments to Land Transport Act 1998 (continued)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members we come first to the interrupted consideration of the Land Transport (Clean Vehicles) Amendment Bill. When we were last considering this bill Part 1 was being debated. The question is that Part 1 stand part.
Salesa Jenny; Brown SimeonHOUSE IN COMMITTEECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): I call on Simeon Brown.SIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Chair and thank you for the opportunity to discuss the Land Transport (Clean Vehicles) Amendment Bill. We were debating—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): May I ask the member to take a seat please. I'm sorry there is one motion that needs to put through. The House is in committee for further consideration of the Land Transport (Clean Vehicles) Amendment Bill and the Land Transport (Drug Driving) Amendment Bill for the consideration of the Crown Pastoral Land Reform Bill and for further consideration of the Commerce Amendment Bill.
Sepuloni CarmelINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY COMMITTEEMembershipHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development and Employment) on behalf of the Prime Minister: I move That under section 196 of the Intelligence and Security Act 2017 this House endorse Nicola Willis as a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee nominated by the Leader of the Opposition under section 195(1) of the Act and in accordance with section 194(2)(c) of the Act replacing Dr Shane Reti.Motion agreed to.
SpeechPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: No papers have been presented. No bills have been introduced. A petition has been delivered to Clerk for presentationCLERK: Petition of Save the Children New Zealand requesting that the House retain the Children's Commissioner as a named role with authority to report directly to the Prime Minister and consult with children before progressing the Oversight of Oranga Tamariki System and Children and Young People's Commission Bill.SPEAKER: That petition stands referred to the Petitions Committee. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Reports of the Environment Committee:on the 2020/21 annual review of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment andon the petition of Vandana Erin Ryder.
Salesa JennyWEDNESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2022The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSHon JENNY SALESA (Assistant Speaker): Ke tau lotu. 'E 'Otua Mafimafi kuo mau taa'i mālie 'i ho'o 'ofá mo e ngaahi tāpuaki hono kotoa. 'Oku tuku homau lotó ka mau hū atu ke ke malu'i ange mu'a 'a e Kuiní mo tataki 'emau fua fatongia 'i he Fale Aleá 'aki 'a e poto Faka-'Otua 'ofa pea mo e 'ulungaanga malū ko e 'uhí ko e mo'ui mo e melino 'a e fonuá. 'Oku mau kole atu 'a e ngaahi me'á ni hono kotoa 'i he huafa ho 'alo ka ko homau fakamo'uí 'Emeni.
Tuesday 15 February 2022 (continued on Wednesday 16 February 2022) - Volume 757
Lawyers and Conveyancers (Employed Lawyers Providing Free Legal Services) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That Lawyers and Conveyancers (Employed Lawyers Providing Free Legal Services) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 45New Zealand National 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 75New Zealand Labour 65; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion not agreed to.
Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion (Safe Areas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion (Safe Areas) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 108New Zealand Labour 62 (Allan Andersen Ardern Belich Bennett Boyack Brooking Chen Clark Coffey Craig Davis Eagle Edmonds Faafoi Halbert Henare Henderson Hipkins Jackson Leary Lewis Little Lorck Lubeck Luxton Mahuta Mallard McAnulty McLellan Nash Ngobi O'Connor D O'Connor G Omer Pallett Parker Prime Radhakrishnan Roberts Robertson Rurawhe Russell Salesa Sepuloni Sharma Sio Tinetti Tirikatene Twyford Utikere Verrall Wall Walters Warren-Clark Webb Whaitiri White Williams A Williams P Wood Woods); New Zealand National 24 (Bayly Bennett Bishop Bridges Brownlee Collins Dean Doocey Goldsmith Grigg Kuriger Luxon McClay McKelvie Mitchell Mooney Muller Reti Simpson Smith Stanford van de Molen Watts Willis); Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 12New Zealand Labour 3 (Kanongata'a-Suisuiki Leavasa Strange); New Zealand National 9 (Brown Hipango Lee O'Connor Penk Pugh Simmonds Upston Woodhouse).Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
Plain Language Bill — First Reading
Salesa JennyA party vote was called for on the question That the Plain Language Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is That the Plain Language Bill be considered by the Governance and Administration Committee.Motion agreed to.Bill referred to the Governance and Administration Committee.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m.The House adjourned at 12.55 p.m. (Wednesday)
Salesa JennyPLAIN LANGUAGE BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 20 October 2021.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): During the last debate on this bill it was call No. 7 that we ended on; so the next call is for speaker No. 8 which is a member of the Labour Party. I call Ginny Andersen.
Tinetti JanHon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Internal Affairs): I'm a little bit perplexed that that member would get up and suggest that a hard-working select committee would come to the conclusion that they disagreed with this bill on the basis of pure spite. This select committee did an absolutely amazing job at investigating if this bill was right the policy work had been done to ensure that this bill could be the best it could be. But the select committee came to the conclusion that not enough policy work has been done. Putting this through in this form without doing that policy work would be irresponsible and would be poor lawmaking—that would be the bottom line.The select committee did not say this should just go away. They looked at it and said There may be some merit here but somebody needs to do the policy work around this to ensure that we're getting the settings right." The select committee knew that cost was a significant barrier to access justice but there was currently limited research. Who puts law in place based on limited research? It doesn't happen. We have an evidence-based practice in this country for law. The policy work gets done first. So on that basis on this side of the House we cannot—cannot—support this bill at this time. So therefore we will not be supporting this bill further."
SpeechDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. I just want to thank the sponsor of this bill Chris Bishop for raising a very important issue that we were keen to engage on in select committee. It is certainly important that access to justice is equitable and anything like this to make it easier on people is probably a good thing.Nevertheless the select committee did raise quite a few concerns particularly with the Law Society submission—others as well—but the practicality of the bill suddenly became less obvious. At the end of the day when we start to deal with issues like that and submissions like that and we see that as other speakers have said it doesn't quite set out to achieve its good intent—and it is a good intent. I think it has given an opportunity it's brought the submitters together to actually say there is law change that's probably needed here—some work for the Government to do perhaps or another member's bill but this probably isn't it.I thank the member again. From ACT's perspective unfortunately we have decided to switch and to no longer support this bill. Thank you Madam Speaker.
SpeechDr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Green): Kia ora I stand on behalf of my colleague Golriz Ghahraman to stand in support of this bill. We support—absolutely—volunteer effort and in terms of access to justice and in the degree to which the Government has any sense of the unmet needs out there I would dispute that they do. It is an extremely racist justice system that we have. Many Māori; Pasifika; many many lower-income people struggle to get the advice they need. When we have a system where young Māori are routinely told Just plead guilty and you'll get a better sentence" by the people who are actually given to them as legal aid we've got some really basic core issues happening here. So if they have access to someone in their family in their community that they could go and just have a quick word to we think that's a really good idea.We hear the points about supervision and systems where we would be fine to look at whatever the Law Society thought would be good to do. We have problems with the thought that an employer at one time can control the productivity the skills the knowledge and the experience of the employees outside of that workplace and that somehow the supervision they receive whilst inside that workplace somehow ceases to exist when they leave it. We don't think that is accurate.Many lawyers I imagine—they certainly are in my family—are under pressure all the time to provide advice and we want to give support to them to do that well to do that properly. I certainly agree that that's not going to stop. I have fully bailed up my cousin who's an expert in family law; I have fully bailed up my mate who's now a flash judge and so since I became an MP was much more careful about that. But that happens everywhere. That absolutely happens in this country and the fact that it's illegal is very odd to us.We support people using their skills to benefit their communities and their families as other people in most other and probably every other workplace can do. And so with those short words we commend this bill to the House. Kia ora."
McAnulty KieranKIERAN McANULTY (Labour—Wairarapa): We're in a similar situation to last night where it doesn't appear that many people particularly those who wish to oppose this wish to stand up and have a yarn. Therefore I'll take the opportunity to talk about this bill. I'm very much in favour of this bill and I hope that it does continue to enjoy the support we've seen in the first reading. This I think is just about safety and a very simple proposition: does this House think it's OK for people who are seeking a legal medical procedure to be harassed and intimidated? That's the question that we have to consider today. I say no it's not OK—very simple. This is a legal activity regardless of what people may think of it regardless of what their views are on the moral question of abortion. That debate has been had. That debate has been won and people that don't like it—that's fine but they've got to accept it and they don't I believe have the right to impose on those who are seeking what is a legal medical procedure.I get the arguments against abortion. I don't agree with them but I get it because I was raised as and still am a Catholic. But I come back to the point that was raised a number of times when this House was discussing the question of whether abortion should sit within the Crimes Act. People can have their own views but what right do they have to impose those views on the choice of others. People can believe through religious or other reasons that abortion is wrong. That's their right and good on them if that's what they think. Again I don't agree—I wholeheartedly don't agree—but if that's what they think fine. How dare they impose that view on others.If someone chooses for their own reasons to seek this medical procedure they should be able to do so as if they were seeking any other medical procedure. They should be able to arrive access it and leave without anybody imposing their views on them without anybody impeding them harassing them or abusing them. Some may say We don't want to do that. That's abhorrent. We just want to talk to them." Nah sorry—you want to talk to them on the basis of telling them that their decision is wrong. I don't think you have that right. By all means go and protest if you want but do it somewhere it doesn't impinge on somebody else's legal right to seek a medical procedure.I think we have to take a step back and fight for rights of people to freedom of speech and freedom of protest but we have seen very recently how protests can cross the line. We will fight in Parliament at every opportunity for people's right to protest but when that protest then stops other people going about their rightful legal lives that I believe is crossing the line. What this bill will achieve when it passes is ensure that people that are pursuing a legal right to a medical procedure can do so safely. I commend Louisa Wall for bringing this bill to the House. I say to members in the House: if you're going to vote against it fine—get up and tell us why."
Radhakrishnan PriyancaHon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector): Thank you Madam Speaker. I too rise to take a very short call on this bill a bill that I'm incredibly supportive of. I've spent most of my work life prior to Parliament in the women's rights space supporting women's rights. I've met over the years that I've been in Parliament with Terry Bellamak from the Abortion Law Reform Association of New Zealand I've gone out and visited abortion clinics as well and I couldn't be more supportive of this bill that aims to reduce the intimidation and harassment that many women face as they enter or walk towards abortion clinics but equally the intimidation and harassment that staff at these clinics face daily with people protesting very close to the doors in ways that can be quite scary.I just want to quote something that Terry mentioned—it has been mentioned in the House by other speakers as well and I feel very strongly about it because this is often pitted as a freedom of expression debate and it's not—she says and I quote Freedom of expression does not include the right to target a captive audience and force them to listen to your message. People tell me they find the harassment outside the abortion services intimidating and upsetting." As other speakers have noted today in their contributions having an abortion is in itself is an incredibly scary time for many women and having people with explicit messaging and often photographs right in your face as you're walking to those clinics—and for the staff day in day out—is intimidation.This bill doesn't remove the rights to protest it's a right that all of us I think in this House hold strongly but it doesn't allow them to be quite so in your face and intimidate women going in. So for those reasons I support this bill and commend it to the House."
Mitchell MarkHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa): It's my pleasure to stand and take a call on this the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion (Safe Areas) Amendment Bill. I acknowledge the member in charge of the bill Louisa Wall. She seems to have the luck of the Irish in having her bills come to the House. But the thing that I always like about the way that Louisa approaches her members' bills is that she does a lot of cross-party consultation. She came and spoke to me about this bill when it was first drawn and absolutely I support it.I think that it doesn't remove the right for people to protest but what it does is it puts a safe area in place for women and their families when they're going through what is an extremely stressful—you know they're going through something that's extremely stressful to them anyway and when you look around the world it's very sad to see that often at these abortion clinics you'll see doctors attacked verbally abused you'll see women attacked and verbally abused. I think it's only right that they're allowed to go there and they're allowed to have access to medical support without actually having to be subjected to that type of sometimes physical but definitely verbal abuse—and even having their photos taken with the risk of their going up on social media.So it's a good bill and I'm very happy to stand in the House and take a call and support it.
Brooking RachelRACHEL BROOKING (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. Thank you for the opportunity to make a short call on the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion (Safe Areas) Amendment Bill and of course the focus there is on the safe areas. As the previous speaker has just said laws have already been passed to decriminalise abortion but they did not provide for this safe area and it's so important that when women have made a decision to seek medical help and to seek an abortion they can do so in some peace. I reside in beautiful Dunedin. We often have protesters outside of the hospital and I'd like to credit a friend of mine Sam Sharpe who often stands out there with them in trying to support the women who are coming in to have an abortion. So I'm sure he's got better things to do with his time and will be able to not do that in terms of when this legislation is passed and that safe area is provided for those women who have always made a very tough decision—to decide to have an abortion. It's not an easy thing to do. It has a huge impact on your body of course and it's so important that once they've made that decision they can go ahead with it in a safe way. So for the reasons that previous speakers have spoken to as well I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Madam Speaker. Several years ago I had the privilege of serving on the international board of Amnesty International at a time when we began a journey of truly fighting for women's rights. This included violence against women women's education but also critically women's right to health. Over the course of that role but also many others I've heard some very personal stories from women about the barriers to accessing healthcare they've faced both overseas and in New Zealand. Many faced harassment obstruction or intimidation and there have also been stories of women who didn't have an experience of harassment or obstruction but who spoke about being terrified that they would that they'd have their photo shared on social media. They were terrified of being identified or harassed while trying to access a health service. There were some who chose simply not to present to access that health service at a healthcare facility.Terry Bellamak wrote last year of the problems we faced and she wrote The actions of harassers sometimes take a turn for the dramatic. Shouts of 'murderer' or 'have mercy on your baby'. Or pelting people with baby doll parts … Sometimes they say things like 'you don't have to do this' … But people being harassed can recognise when they are being condemned whether the weapon is abuse or condescension."So what about the argument that this is about freedom of speech? Well as we know rights and freedoms in New Zealand are subject to a balancing act. Freedom of speech considerations have to be balanced by the ability to access healthcare and what we must determine is whether the provisions are a justifiable limitation of the right. In this case this health access proposal doesn't remove a right to free speech; it proposes a reasonable limitation allowing individuals to protest outside of the protected access area. Women should be just able to walk up and access healthcare providers without being harassed without being obstructed.I'd also note that for many women—in fact some of our most vulnerable women—without this bill the effect of the Abortion Legislation Act 2020 which decriminalised abortion will be meaningless. They'll simply be too scared to access the services that they're entitled to. For some this'll mean engaging in unsafe practices or putting their own health at risk. Having a right to health includes the ability to have access to that right safely. I commend this bill to the House."
Salesa JennyCONTRACEPTION STERILISATION AND ABORTION (SAFE AREAS) AMENDMENT BILLSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 10 November 2021.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Before we begin the debate I'll advise members that in accordance with a decision of the Business Committee there will be a split party vote at the end of the debate. When the House was last debating this bill it gave leave for this to be a two-hour debate with speeches of not more than 10 minutes so that if there's time left from the shorter speeches it can be used by other members.
SpeechREPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Madam Speaker the committee has considered the Harmful Digital Communications (Unauthorised Posting of Intimate Visual Recording) Amendment Bill and reports it with amendment. The committee has also considered the Sunscreen (Product Safety Standard) Bill and reports it with amendment. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
Sunscreen (Product Safety Standard) Bill — In Committee
SpeechSUNSCREEN (PRODUCT SAFETY STANDARD) BILLIn CommitteeCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members we come now to the consideration in committee of the Sunscreen (Product Safety Standard) Bill. The first debate will be on clause 1. This is the debate on the title. The question is that clause 1 stand part.
Harmful Digital Communications (Unauthorised Posting of Intimate Visual Recording) Amendment Bill — In Committee
Salesa JennyHARMFUL DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS (UNAUTHORISED POSTING OF INTIMATE VISUAL RECORDING) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeClause 1 TitleCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): We come first to the Harmful Digital Communications (Unauthorised Posting of Intimate Visual Recording) Amendment Bill. The first debate is on clause 1. This is the debate on the title. The question is that clause 1 stand part.Clause 1 agreed to.Clause 2 CommencementCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that clause 2 stand part.Clause 2 agreed to.Clause 3 Principal ActCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that clause 3 stand part.Clause 3 agreed to.Clause 3A Section 4 amended (Interpretation)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members we come now to clause 3A. This is the debate on amendments to section 4. The question is that clause 3A stand part. The question is that Louisa Wall's amendments to clause 3A set out on Supplementary Order Paper 82 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that Golriz Ghahraman's amendments to clause 3A set out in Supplementary Order Paper 103 be agreed to.Amendments not agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that clause 3A as amended stand part.Clause 3A as amended agreed to.Clause 3B Section 20 amended (Court may vary or discharge order)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that clause 3B stand part.Clause 3B agreed to.Clause 3C Section 21 amended (Offence of non-compliance with order)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that clause 3C stand part.Clause 3C agreed to.Clause 3D Section 22 amended (Causing harm by posting digital communication)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members we now come to clause 3D which is the debate on the amendment to section 22: Causing harm by posting digital communication. The question is that clause 3D stand part. The question is that Louisa Wall's amendment to clause 3D set out on Supplementary Order Paper 82 be agreed to.Amendment agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that clause 3D as amended stand part.Clause 3D as amended agreed to.Clause 4 New sections 22A and 22B insertedCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that clause 4 stand part.Clause 4 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): I will report the bill with amendment.
Salesa JennyHOUSE IN COMMITTEECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members the House is in committee on the Harmful Digital Communications (Unauthorised Posting of Intimate Visual Recording) Amendment Bill and the Sunscreen (Product Safety Standard) Bill.
McAnulty KieranBUSINESS OF THE HOUSEKIERAN McANULTY (Chief Whip—Labour): Point of order. Thank you Madam Speaker. After consultation with the other parties I seek leave to postpone the second reading of the Biosecurity (Information for Incoming Passengers) Amendment Bill in the name of Steph Lewis and the second reading of the Unit Titles (Strengthening Body Corporate Governance and Other Matters) Amendment Bill in the name of Nicola Willis until the next members' day.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Could the member please confirm that you do have the agreement of both members in charge of those bills for this course of action.Kieran McAnulty: Yes.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you. Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none. Those bills are postponed until the next members' day. I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Harmful Digital Communications (Unauthorised Posting of Intimate Visual Recording) Amendment Bill and the Sunscreen (Product Safety Standard) Bill.
Paige Harris Birth Registration Bill — First Reading
SpeechLOUISA WALL (Labour): Just in conclusion can I again thank Todd Muller who represented the National Party Teanau Tuiono from the Greens James McDowall from ACT who as your internal affairs spokespeople took this through your caucus; and also Te Paati Māori for their tautoko and obviously from our Labour team we have been 100 percent supportive of this piece of legislation. Just finally I want to say to Kyle specifically that your tenacity you're fortitude and your love for your wife is commendable because you've put your family's experience out there and you have allowed us to experience all the emotions that come from not only having a child but losing a spouse. And it has been an incredibly painful and traumatic journey for you but I hope that there is some peace in your heart as we as a Parliament have come together to support your aspiration and your aspiration is for your daughter Paige to have her mother's name on her birth certificate before Paige turns two on 25 March. I know from everybody here in this Parliament we share your aspiration and we will do all we can as a Parliament to fulfil your obligations to your wife and your aspiration. Nō reira tēnā koutou tēnā koutou tēnā tātou katoa. Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is That Paige Harris Birth Registration Bill be considered by the Governance and Administration Committee.Motion agreed to.Bill referred to the Governance and Administration Committee.LOUISA WALL (Labour): I move That the Paige Harris Birth Registration Bill be reported to the House by 4 March 2022 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 193 195 and 196(1)(b) and (c). Motion agreed to.
SpeechDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker and I say on behalf of ACT thank you to Louisa Wall for bringing this work to the House. This was one of those cases when it came through where I thought—again reflecting on the nature of the system and the outdated laws—that it was extraordinary that it needed to need legislative intervention like this to get this issue sorted. So I think it really highlights just how archaic and out of date our laws are and certainly we're very interested in working to see those changed. ACT will obviously be supporting this and I just want to say to Kyle: thank you for your perseverance. This has been a long journey and a lot of work to get it to this point and obviously my colleagues around the House have put their thanks out to the many people involved in this. So thank you once again. You've highlighted a change that's necessary in our legislation and I'm sure we'll get to it but I wish you and your family all the best. ACT is certainly very supportive of this. Thank you.
Tuiono TeanauTEANAU TUIONO (Green): Thank you Madam Speaker. First of all I wanted to acknowledge the aroha behind this bill—the aroha for the whānau the aroha for Kyle Harris. When this was brought to my attention that's what kind of radiated out of the email and the pages for me and the connections between that whānau the father the intending mother the whānau that carried baby Paige as well. I would like to acknowledge that: tēnei te mihi atu ki a koutou te whānau i whai wāhi te hari tēnei kaupapa ki mua i te aroaro o tēnei Pāremata nā runga i te aroha nā runga i te ngākau ki tēnā tēnā o tātou ki tō mokopuna ki tō pēpi otirā ki ngā uri whakaheke.[This is an acknowledgment of the family that took the opportunity to place this issue before this Parliament with love and affection to each and every one of us to your grandchild to your baby as well as to the future generations.]When I looked at this I really thought about it from the perspective of whakapapa and the importance of whakapapa and how that can play a really crucial part in shaping the identity of our children of our babies. It helps to centre them in this world it helps them to understand their connections with their close-knit family but also with their wider families as well. For me that's what whānau is all about and I acknowledge what Louisa Wall was saying earlier how our laws are archaic and not fit for purpose in terms of our modern families but I would also say that sometimes it's not fit for purpose for the ways that families have always been the way that families have been connected in different ways. It's not just about families; it's about whānau and what that means for our tamariki mokopuna.Also supporting the calls around the House to Louisa for bringing this to our attention. This showed up very quickly and I knew that we were going to support it and just being able to go through that process as well.The Greens are very supportive of this kaupapa. It puts the child at the centre of the whānau; it puts the child at the centre of how we should be thinking about how to do these things. I was surprised at the inflexibility within the legislation. I was surprised with how rigid it was—that it wouldn't be able to bend into shape in ways that would meet the needs of modern families but in many ways not meet the needs of the way that whānau have always been.So the Greens will be supporting this bill. Nā runga i te aroha ki te whānau ki te Pāpā Kyle otirā ki tō hoa rangatira i wehe atu. Anei mātou ngā Kākāriki e mihi kau ana ki a koutou otirā tēnā tātou katoa.[With love for the family for the father Kyle as well as for your late wife. We the Greens acknowledge you. Greetings one and all.]
Tuesday 15 February 2022 - Volume 757
Conversion Practices Prohibition Legislation Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Conversion Practices Prohibition Legislation Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 112New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 25 (Bayly Bennett Bishop Brownlee Collins Dean Doocey Goldsmith Grigg Hipango Kuriger Luxon McKelvie Mitchell Mooney Muller Pugh Simmonds Simpson Smith Stanford Upston van de Molen Watts Willis); Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 8New Zealand National 8 (Bridges Brown Lee McClay O'Connor Penk Reti Woodhouse).Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
11. Question No. 11—HealthTĀMATI COFFEY (Labour) to the Associate Minister of HealthQuestion No. 11—Health 11. TĀMATI COFFEY (Labour) to the Associate Minister of Health: What progress has been made on the booster roll-out in aged residential care facilities?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Associate Minister of Health): The most important thing anyone including seniors can do to protect themselves and their loved ones is get boosted. We know that older people living in aged residential care are among our most vulnerable and we've seen overseas what can happen when COVID-19 gets established in facilities with low vaccination coverage. That's why it's been so important to use the time that our border protections and contact tracing has brought us to complete the booster roll-out in all aged-care facilities around New Zealand. I want to thank the vaccinators aged-care providers and the staff that have worked so hard to ensure the smooth delivery of the booster programme.Tāmati Coffey: What other measures are in place in aged residential care to help protect residents and staff?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Everyone in the aged-care sector is committed to protecting residents and staff. The Ministry of Health is working with providers to ensure infection prevention and control is of the highest standard. In addition to boosters and the supply and use of appropriate personal protective equipment we are also strengthening testing of staff in aged residential care. As part two of our Omicron health response anyone working or living in these facilities with symptoms will be prioritised for a PCR test to protect these residents at the highest risk. On top of that aged residential care facilities will be able to test asymptomatic visitors using rapid antigen tests.Tāmati Coffey: What progress has been made delivering booster shots to the wider over-65 population?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Vaccination rates for older New Zealanders have been one of the success stories of our COVID response: 99 percent of people over the age of 65 are fully vaccinated and more than 85 percent have now been boosted. We know that getting a booster shot is the best defence against Omicron so I urge anyone who is eligible for a booster but hasn't got around to it yet to take the time to head out to one of the hundreds of vaccination sites up and down the country and get boosted.
7. Question No. 7—HealthTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 7—Health7. TANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made about influenza vaccines?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Health): Last week I announced that the Government will fund a quarter of a million more free flu vaccines for this year's winter campaign to protect our most vulnerable communities and the health system. The efforts of all of us so far have helped prevent our hospitals from being overwhelmed with COVID-19 but we know as we prepare to reconnect to the world that we can expect to see more seasonal flu in New Zealand. As a result of funding these additional flu doses up to 2 million New Zealanders will be eligible for a free flu vaccination in 2022. Vaccinating more people from the flu will save lives preserve capacity in our hospitals and is part of our plan to get through the COVID-19 pandemic. The good news is the flu vaccine can be safely administered at the same time as the COVID-19 vaccine whether that be a booster shot or a paediatric vaccine so we'll run this campaign alongside the wider COVID-19 vaccine campaign such as the paediatric and booster vaccinations to better protect our vulnerable communities from preventable disease.Tangi Utikere: What are the priorities in delivering this increased funding?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: We know that the 2022 influenza season will likely have a greater health impact than the previous two years and by increasing influenza vaccination rates alongside our wider COVID-19 vaccination programme we will protect our most vulnerable communities from vaccine-preventable diseases. This is particularly important for Māori and Pacific populations who have greater need because of statistically higher rates of pre-existing conditions and routinely lower rates of influenza vaccinations across those groups.Tangi Utikere: When will vaccinations using this funding begin?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The influenza vaccination programme will begin on 1 April this year. Ahead of this officials at the Ministry of Health and Pharmac are confirming the enhanced eligibility criteria for a free flu vaccination with a focus on increasing uptake for those already eligible for the influenza vaccination as well as those at risk. We wanted to maximise uptake by those who are already eligible for a free dose which means that they will be available for pregnant women people over the age of 65 and people who have certain medical conditions including those with cancer and diabetes. I want to remind everyone that while they can get their COVID-19 vaccinations at the same time as their influenza vaccine the best thing they can do to keep themselves and their family and their community safe is to get vaccinated or boosted against COVID19 as soon as possible.
2. Question No. 2—FinanceBARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 2—Finance2. BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The exports sector continues to drive economic growth in New Zealand. Statistics New Zealand reported in early February the export of goods in December rose by 13 percent to a new monthly high of $6.1 billion compared with the same period a year ago. Dairy products—milk powder butter and cheese—again lead the way and I acknowledge the important role—Hon Member: Thank the farmers.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: —there you are!—that that industry plays in New Zealand. The meat sector also saw sales rise 19 percent to $879 million. On an annual basis exports are up 5.6 percent from the previous year to $63.2 billion. I'd like to thank our exporters for contributing strongly to the economy during what is a volatile environment.Barbara Edmonds: What else did the report show on trade and its impact on confidence in the economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The overseas merchandise trade figures show that businesses do appear confident to be investing more in the economy and in New Zealand's recovery. Imports of machinery and plant rose 18 percent to $905 million in December compared with the same month a year earlier. For the December quarter imports of machinery and plant rose 31 percent to $2.8 billion for the year. The same imports rose 20 percent to $9.8 billion. Despite the uncertainty around the pandemic the New Zealand economy does remain resilient.Barbara Edmonds: What other reports has he seen on the economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Statistics New Zealand did release their food price index yesterday. It did show that prices rose 2.7 percent in January the largest monthly rise in five years. On a seasonally adjusted basis overall food prices rose 1.1 percent. This annual increase that we've seen is the largest since August 2011 when prices rose by 6.6 percent. The environment does remain volatile with COVID-19 disruptions pushing up prices globally for food and other products such as fuel. We do acknowledge the rise of cost of living is challenging for New Zealanders and that is why we have supported people through the pandemic to protect their jobs and livelihoods and taken actions to lift the incomes of the lowest-income New Zealanders including benefit increases and minimum wage increases—both of which were opposed by the Opposition.
Salesa JennyREPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Madam Speaker the committee has considered the Land Transport (Clean Vehicles) Amendment Bill and reports progress. The committee has also considered the Land Transport (Drug Driving) Amendment Bill and reports no progress. I move That the report be adopted. Motion agreed to.Report adopted.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): The House is suspended and I will resume the Chair at 9 a.m. tomorrow morning for the extended sitting. Pō mārie.Sitting suspended from 9.58 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Wednesday)
Simpson ScottHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Thank you Madam Chair. Earlier in the committee's discussions I asked the Minister about the revenue and where it would go and I specifically asked a question relating to whether it would go into the consolidated fund or where and the reply came back from the Minister that it would go into the National Land Transport Fund. But the question I have is relating to clause 6 where it says In the heading to section 168AA replace 'national land transport fund' with 'Crown Bank Account'." so I'm interested to know from the Minister quite why that would be. Is the replacement of the National Land Transport Fund as he has answered earlier with Crown bank account—does that mean that there's going to be some kind of intermediary slush fund where the revenue will be collected and if it is going to be collected in this sort of intermediary slush fund who will administer it how will it be administered who will have control over it and what will happen to those funds during the period of time that the revenue is held in the "Crown Bank Account" which is not the National Land Transport Fund?So it seems to me that there is an area that is grey and uncertain in this matter which I think the Minister needs to make clear. As we know as my colleagues have made very clear in this discussion and debate so far this evening this is a Government that likes to tax likes to collect money from taxpayers likes to have big buckets of money that they can then try and dole out and use for a whole range of petty political party policies of the sort that they have become famous for.And then there's a second matter that I'm quite keen for the Minister to answer a question on and it relates to the "Interpretation in this Part" new section 172(1) in clause 7 and it says that "category 1 light vehicle importer means a person who carries on the business of importing new or used light vehicles and whom the Director approves as a category 1 light vehicle importer under the regulations". Now I didn't have the opportunity to sit on the select committee so forgive me if this has been defined somewhere else but I'm keen to know what the director will choose as a definition for someone who carries on the business of importing new or light vehicles. Is that someone who imports one vehicle a year is it someone who imports two vehicles a year or is it someone who imports three or four or five? What is the quantum? What is the definition? When does a person who acts as an importer become someone who meets the designation of being by the director someone who "carries on the business"? What is the definition of that? So if the Minister could give me an answer I would appreciate it.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): With apologies for the very excellent questions asked but the time has come for me to report progress.House resumed."
Cameron MarkMARK CAMERON (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. Just very quickly Minister I'm fascinated to know what official advice he's actually had on any supportive infrastructure that would be needed in rural New Zealand—i.e. charging stations etc.? When would it be readily available and what sort of additional cost—notwithstanding this is already an expensive exercise for rural New Zealand farmers and communities—would it add to their overall costs of running the business? Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): A great deal of advice but none of it relates to Part 1 of this bill.
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I couldn't help but rise in response to that. What a mischaracterisation by the Minister. We are not proposing a doomsday of getting out of cars. What we're saying is the difference on this side of the House is we back New Zealanders to make the right decisions. We want to give them the carrots; these guys want to give New Zealanders the sticks because they don't believe New Zealanders will do the right thing. And they'll bring out a stick from the beltway of Wellington and smack regional New Zealanders around with it. I want to point out—look coming back to the title Land Transport (Clean Vehicles) Amendment Bill—we're not just talking about electric vehicles here. When you look at what the Minister referenced in his last response about being appropriate for international and domestic climate change ambitions—no one disagrees with that—but even in the Minister's own comment to a previous question when we asked about the carve-out of utes because some occupations do not have a choice under this bill the Minister said Well they'll be coming on stream in a couple of years". Surely there's going to be an unintended consequence there because some of the emissions savings is around fuel efficiency—cars that are more fuel efficient. So if you've got a dirty gas-guzzler and you know at the moment you're going to be charged a tax to replace that ute and you've got no other choice then you're going to sit on that gas-guzzler for longer. Why not give that farmer or tradie an incentive to shift? But that's not what they are looking at. This is not pragmatic; we've clearly outlined under Part 1 new sections 167B and 167A in clause 5—there is a pragmatic approach where some New Zealanders could get a carve-out because they do not have choice.On this side of the House we're pragmatic and we want to give people carrots and we know that New Zealanders—given the right framework and the right settings—will make the right decisions."