edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:675;Page:21354] 
11. 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: How is the Government working to better protect and support our vulnerable children? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 In Budget 2011 we put in $43.7 million to support children in State care who are our most vulnerable. Part of the package ensures that all children who enter our care—around 2200 in any given year—will be comprehensively assessed for their health and education needs. We know that unfortunately around 88 percent of children coming into State care have previously unidentified health issues and 40 percent have a mental health disorder. The changes kicked in from 1 July and so far we have had 136 children in our care be referred for and go through the gateway assessments. 
Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga 
: How else is this package supporting New Zealand children in State care? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Our policy change also included 20 hours’ early childhood education for children in State care who are aged between 18 months and 3 years—an investment of more than $11 million—to improve the outcomes for these children. I am delighted that already nearly 100 children have accessed this education and that number is about a quarter of what we expect in any given year.
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:675;Page:21353] 
9. 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
 to the  
Minister for Climate Change Issues 
: What reports has the Government received on the performance of the ETS and on trends in New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 Reports show that a reversal from deforestation to afforestation and a significant increase in renewable electricity incentivised by the emissions trading scheme have reduced New Zealand’s emissions for the first 2 consecutive years since 1990. Our emissions are 4 percent down on 2008 levels. This compares with a 23 percent increase in emissions during the period between 2000 and 2008. The report of the emissions trading scheme review panel led by the Hon David Caygill released today confirms the Government’s confidence in the emissions trading scheme as the most effective way for New Zealand to reduce emissions at least cost. The report also supports the 2009 changes in respect of industry allocations and recommends that no change be made to those provisions. 
Nikki Kaye 
: How has the electricity sector responded to the price signal of the emissions trading scheme given that this sector has seen the largest increase in emissions—130 percent—since 1990? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Last year was the best for renewables in a decade with 74 percent of generation being produced from hydro wind and geothermal sources. In the last year 1340 megawatts of new renewable generation has been built—five times the level of the last average when most of the new generation was ironically fossil fuelled. This shift is the product not just of the emissions trading scheme but also of the Government’s reforms to the Resource Management Act and the adoption of the National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation.
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:675;Page:21351] 
7. 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: What reports has she received on the results of the legislation passed by this Government allowing the Police to seize the proceeds of crime? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 I am very pleased to report that the Police have been highly successful in investigating and seizing assets funded by criminal activity since the passing of the enabling legislation in December 2009. Police are currently holding restraining orders over $40 million worth of assets and a further $8 million has now been forfeited to the Crown. This Government is serious about confiscating the profits of crime and putting gangs out of business. I am advised that this Act is having a substantial and rising impact on organised crime and drug offending. 
Tim Macindoe 
: What is the range of assets that have been restrained by the police and what other steps are being taken to boost their investigations further? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The assets restrained under the Act include five boats 30 motorbikes 74 other vehicles one art collection five commercial properties six farms 10 lifestyle blocks 42 residential properties and substantial holdings of cash and bank accounts. I am advised that the police have now struck memorandums of understanding with other Government agencies to enable the disclosure and sharing of information so that the legislation can be used to the maximum extent possible. These agencies include the Solicitor-General the official assignee and the Inland Revenue Department.
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:675;Page:21349] 
5. 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: What reports has he received about any discussions with Ngai Tahu regarding the application from Ceres Environmental to establish an earthquake demolition waste dump in residential Papanui; and what was Ngai Tahu’s response if any? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 I have not received any reports about any discussions with Ngai Tahu in relation to this proposal. The Christchurch City Council and Environment Canterbury are the decision makers in relation to any resource consents needed for the proposal. An Order in Council under the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act provides for temporary storage of earthquake demolition waste but it still requires the consent of both the city council and the regional council. 
Rahui Katene 
: Is the Minister aware of the expected environmental impact of the site; and how appropriate is it that the proposed site is close to a school and residential properties? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: In calling the Minister to answer I do not want to deprive him of answering the question but as he pointed out in his answer to the primary question the Minister is not actually responsible for any decision with regard to where such a dump might go. However recognising that fact I am happy for the Minister to attempt to answer the question. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I do not have the details of the proposals. I expect the city council and the regional council would need to give consideration to issues of noise and potential dust as well as to issues of any contamination of stormwater coming off such a site. I also expect that if any of the immediate communities such as schools were likely to be affected the councils would consult those affected parties. 
Rahui Katene 
: What involvement will there be with Nga Kaihautu Tikanga Taiao the statutory advisory committee that has been established to advise the Environmental Protection Authority on matters relating to policy process and applications from a Maori perspective? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The advisory committee is for the Environmental Protection Authority. It deals only with very large nationally significant consents. Although I do not have the detail of the specific consent before me I would be highly surprised if it met the national significance tests of applications that go before the Environmental Protection Authority so I would not expect it to have any role.
Power Simon: Business Statement 
Power Simon: Business Statement 
[Volume:675;Page:21343] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I thank the shadow Leader of the House for his offer of facilitation on that particular matter. It is the Government’s intention to introduce that legislation at the first opportunity. Discussions may well follow from the introduction of that legislation. In respect of the shadow Leader of the House’s second matter about other legislation the Government is always busy and is keen to make the most of every remaining minute between now and 6 October.
Mallard Trevor: Business Statement 
Mallard Trevor: Business Statement 
[Volume:675;Page:21343] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I think a number of questions flow out of that statement especially around the enthralling legislation that the Minister listed. I will ask him in particular about the legislation that flows from the sleepover case. I understand that there is an undertaking from the Government to introduce it and I want to make it clear that as long as it is in the form that is expected the Labour Opposition will facilitate its passage before Christmas if it is necessary as I understand that it is. I also ask him whether any other legislation is contemplated.
Smith Lockwood: Voting — Correction—Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) 
Smith Lockwood: Voting — Correction—Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) 
[Volume:675;Page:21343] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Last night when the Committee was considering the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) the result of the vote on the question that the amendment to clause 7 in the name of the Hon John Boscawen be agreed to was incorrectly announced as Ayes 5 Noes 111. The correct result is Ayes 5 Noes 115. The record will be corrected accordingly.
Sepuloni Carmel: Natural Health Products Bill — First Reading 
Sepuloni Carmel: Natural Health Products Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:21392] 
CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour) 
: 
 Just following on from the Hon Steve Chadwick I will add to what she was saying about the flip-flopping from members opposite. The plans to establish a trans-Tasman therapeutic products agency is a staggering display of flip-flopping by the National Party. We have seen so much of that in this term of the National Government. National has flip-flopped on the issue of natural health products which led to a 5-year delay—as Steve Chadwick has said—in the planned creation of a trans-Tasman therapeutic products agency. This is something that when National members were in Opposition they were totally against and it is typical of how the National Party has played politics with the issue. 
This was exemplified by Michelle Beckett the executive director of Natural Products New Zealand who stated that the National Party sees the natural products sector only as a political football to be leveraged to its political advantage. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Who wrote this speech? 
CARMEL SEPULONI 
: I say to Mr Hutchison that that is what Michelle Beckett said. The Government’s flip-flopping is astounding. When we look back we see that Tony Ryall told Parliament in 2006 that a joint agency would be costly restrictive and unnecessary. 
I will not go on because I think my colleagues have done us justice. We support this bill; we just do not appreciate the inconsistencies from that side of the House that keep occurring. Aside from the general politicking that has surrounded this bill Labour believes that supporting it going through to a select committee will allow it the due process it deserves and the opportunity for New Zealanders to have a say. Thank you very much. 
Bill read a first time.  
Bill referred to the Health Committee.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Canada—Minister of National Defence House of Commons 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Canada—Minister of National Defence House of Commons 
[Volume:675;Page:21343] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that the Hon Peter MacKay Minister of National Defence from the Canadian House of Commons is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the Minister be welcomed.
Douglas Roger: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Douglas Roger: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:675;Page:21348] 
4. 
Hon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: Does the Government ask when considering policy options whether the policy will improve New Zealand’s growth prospects or make them worse; if not why not? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Yes. Overall that is a very important consideration although I have to say that it is not the only factor that the Government considers. 
Hon Sir Roger Douglas 
: In light of the fact that between 2008 and 2011 extra Government spending consumed 98 percent of New Zealand’s $16 billion increase in nominal GDP what factors led the Minister to undertake that increase in spending and did he believe that that spending would improve economic prospects? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: In the first place that is a trend the Government is certainly planning to turn round. That process began in Budget 2011 and will continue. The Government is too big a proportion of the economy. The increase in Government spending was consistent with the Government’s policy objectives which were to protect the most vulnerable through the recession to continue to invest in front-line services and to embark on a very significant infrastructure investment programme. 
Hon Heather Roy 
: How can businesses expect to survive when the Government swallows up just about all of any increased growth that takes place in the economy? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: In the situation of a fairly significant global downturn and also a New Zealand economy that was distorted by rampant housing inflation and huge increases in Government spending that is what actually happened. The Government has set out its plans to reverse that trend because it is important in this economy that people and resources move to the tradable sector where we can earn higher incomes by selling products to the rest of the world and out of the non-tradable sector which has been characterised over the last 10 years by excessive debt and very low productivity. 
Hon Heather Roy 
: What advice did the Government seek and receive on the impact on economic growth and on small businesses when it refused to reinstate youth rates locking young people out of work and preventing businesses from hiring extra staff? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Over the last few years that advice has been I think similar to the consensus that developed in the last 10 years that higher pay rates for young people would not affect their employment prospects. It has probably become a bit more apparent in the last couple of years that that advice maybe was not realistic.
Woodhouse Michael: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Woodhouse Michael: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:21384] 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
: 
 I am very happy to take a quick call on the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill too and certainly to address the issue raised by the member who has just resumed his seat Chris Hipkins. It was a very clear play with statistics by Mr Hipkins when he said that the duration of loan repayments has actually reduced since the introduction of interest-free student loans. That conveniently overlooks the fact that an unsustainably large proportion of student loan debt is not repaid at all and therefore cannot be measured—49c of every dollar was not being repaid when this Government took office. I am very pleased that it has gone down to 43c. The measures that are introduced by this bill will further— 
Chris Hipkins 
: Average repayment times have halved. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: Yes that is right—another very clever play on statistics. If someone does not repay at all then that is not included in the denominator. 
I also want to raise the issue and reassure Mr Nash that the issue of the contact point is in fact a red herring. Those people are not being asked to do anything else but be a contact point. There are no guarantee obligations on them or any other burden but I am sure that will be raised in the select committee. I support the bill.
Vote: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:21385] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 109 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 11 
Green Party 9; Mana 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Bill read a first time. 
Bill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee.
Shearer David: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Shearer David: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:21377] 
DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert) 
: 
 Following on from my colleague Stuart Nash I say that Labour will support the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill going to a select committee. In principle it is something Labour supports. Access for New Zealanders to a tertiary education is something we hold as an extraordinarily important principle here in New Zealand and we obviously oppose anything that might detract from that and make access less easy. I point out in that regard that Mr Key himself was looking at doing away with the interest-free element of student loans certainly before he became Prime Minister. He even said he would oppose interest-free loans with every bone in his body. He also suggested at Victoria University as recently as last year that there might be some changes—that the interest-free provision might in fact be in some jeopardy. 
We completely support the idea that loans need to be repaid and they need to be repaid on time. Again we see that as being fair. The issue of the contact details which Stuart Nash referred to is something we look forward to discussing in the select committee. I think if there is one particular area though that we have some reservations about it is cutting the repayment holiday for overseas borrowers from 3 years to 1 year. We understand why that will happen. It makes it look like National is being tough on those borrowers. But at the same time it may actually have the opposite effect from what we expect. I will quote from the Ministry of Education: “This can be expected to have a negative impact at the margin on the borrowers’ decisions regarding whether to return to New Zealand.” and it will result in an ongoing increase of student loan debt held by the Government of about $12 million a year. So although we support the intent we may need in the select committee to take a better look at the actual part of the legislation—I think it is clause 17—that deals with this change. With those remarks I look forward to this bill being brought up at the select committee and a better discussion being had there.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:675;Page:21343] 
Business Statement 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week the House will be adjourned for 1 week. When the House resumes on Tuesday 27 September the Government intends to move the first reading of the Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill the remaining stages of the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill and other Government business. Seven retiring members will be giving their valedictory statements. Wednesday 28 September is scheduled to be a members’ day. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I think a number of questions flow out of that statement especially around the enthralling legislation that the Minister listed. I will ask him in particular about the legislation that flows from the sleepover case. I understand that there is an undertaking from the Government to introduce it and I want to make it clear that as long as it is in the form that is expected the Labour Opposition will facilitate its passage before Christmas if it is necessary as I understand that it is. I also ask him whether any other legislation is contemplated. 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I thank the shadow Leader of the House for his offer of facilitation on that particular matter. It is the Government’s intention to introduce that legislation at the first opportunity. Discussions may well follow from the introduction of that legislation. In respect of the shadow Leader of the House’s second matter about other legislation the Government is always busy and is keen to make the most of every remaining minute between now and 6 October.
Voting — Correction—Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) 
Voting — Correction—Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) 
[Volume:675;Page:21343] 
Voting 
Correction—Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Last night when the Committee was considering the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) the result of the vote on the question that the amendment to clause 7 in the name of the Hon John Boscawen be agreed to was incorrectly announced as Ayes 5 Noes 111. The correct result is Ayes 5 Noes 115. The record will be corrected accordingly.
Power Simon: Business Statement 
Power Simon: Business Statement 
[Volume:675;Page:21343] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week the House will be adjourned for 1 week. When the House resumes on Tuesday 27 September the Government intends to move the first reading of the Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill the remaining stages of the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill and other Government business. Seven retiring members will be giving their valedictory statements. Wednesday 28 September is scheduled to be a members’ day.
Visitors — Canada—Minister of National Defence House of Commons 
Visitors — Canada—Minister of National Defence House of Commons 
[Volume:675;Page:21343] 
Thursday 15 September 2011 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Canada—Minister of National Defence House of Commons 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that the Hon Peter MacKay Minister of National Defence from the Canadian House of Commons is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the Minister be welcomed.
Vote: Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:21324] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; United Future 1; Mana 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Bill read a first time. 
Bill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee.
Goodhew Jo: Sittings of the House 
Goodhew Jo: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:675;Page:21341] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 Given the progress the House has made I seek leave for the House to now rise. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21340] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 109 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 11 
Green Party 9; Mana 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Part 1 agreed to.
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21340] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 5 
ACT New Zealand 5. 
Noes 115 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; United Future 1; Mana 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 5 Noes 111.
Upston Louise: Local Government Borrowing Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
Upston Louise: Local Government Borrowing Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
[Volume:675;Page:21302] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 It is great to have the opportunity to speak in the third and final reading of the Local Government Borrowing Bill and the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2). In effect this legislation represents a cooperative approach to raising finance in the local government sector. 
I disagree with one of the comments made by a previous speaker. I do not actually believe that by reducing the cost of borrowing we will necessarily see a significant increase in borrowing. I will explain why I disagree. It really comes on the back of other reforms this Government has made under the leadership of the Minister of Local Government Rodney Hide. He has done some fantastic work that has been very widely accepted by the local government sector. He has put in place reforms with our earlier legislative changes that provide better visibility better transparency and better accountability for ratepayers so that they are able to better see exactly what their councils are doing—the levels of borrowing what the borrowing is for—and have better more meaningful reports that are easier to understand. 
I do not believe that necessarily making the borrowing cheaper and making it easier for councils to take on debt for large capital projects will increase the level of debt that councils will take on over and above what is already expected. That is the reality of this. There is a projection of large capital projects over the next decade or two so for local councils to be able to save $25 million in interest costs is quite significant. 
The Minister of Local Government has done a fantastic job in this 3-year period. This legislation is yet another example which we are pleased to get over the line. It is well supported by the House which is I think an important point to make. We are seeing councils working together. They are working together and they are focusing on the efficiencies they can gain by working together and by sharing services. 
Every one of us in this room understands the pressures that our constituents and ratepayers face. They will be very pleased to see this legislation passed because its impact will reduce the burden of their rates in the years ahead. Thank you.
Wagner Nicky: Local Government Borrowing Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
Wagner Nicky: Local Government Borrowing Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
[Volume:675;Page:21296] 
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
: 
 I am delighted to support the Local Government Borrowing Bill and the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill. It is great legislation and it will save ratepayers money. It was one of the good ideas that came out of the Prime Minister’s economic summit and now we are putting it into legislation so that is very positive too. 
New Zealanders are very aware of the need for capital investment in local infrastructure in the oncoming years. It is expected that local government will need to borrow in excess of $10 billion in the next 5 years. Ratepayers want the services that are delivered from this capital but they do not want to pay for rates increases. So I support this legislation because it is all about local councils coordinating their borrowing needs to obtain economies of scale so that they can borrow more cost-effectively. 
This legislation will create the New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency which will be able to issue debt on behalf of all participating local authorities and will have the same regulatory environment as those participating local authorities. Councils by collaborating will be able to get the benefits of the economy of scale and the resulting lower interest rates. Councils are very reliable borrowers and they have a very low credit risk so by coordinating their borrowing demands they will get better deals. In fact the savings have been estimated at about $25 million a year. It is absolutely true that every ratepayer would rather see their council spend money on infrastructure or their priority projects than just on servicing debt. They are very keen to keep rates down and this may help towards that. 
It has also been noted by some members opposite that it will have benefits for the capital market in New Zealand as well. At the moment it is a very fragmented market but this will make it more efficient for both issuers and investors and it will develop a deeper and more liquid market in standardised local authority bonds and that will provide opportunities for both wholesale and retail investors. 
This legislation has the ability to cut costs for local authorities and ratepayers. It is all about doing business smarter and it is a real positive so I commend this bill to the House.
Hide Rodney: Local Government Borrowing Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
Hide Rodney: Local Government Borrowing Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
[Volume:675;Page:21294] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 I move  
That the Local Government Borrowing Bill and the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time 
. The purpose of the Local Government Borrowing Bill is to assist local authorities to borrow funds at lower interest rates than they can currently achieve. The bill will achieve this by facilitating the establishment and the operation of the New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency. Local Government New Zealand has estimated that the funding authority will save local government in the order of $25 million each year. The operation of the agency will also strengthen New Zealand’s capital markets by providing a new high-quality investment option. The scheme is a win for local government and a win for investors. 
Unsurprisingly the bill has a high level of support across the local government sector. I have been advised that around 50 local authorities have indicated that they will participate in this scheme. The bill has also enjoyed a high level of support in the House. No significant amendments have been proposed; technical amendments recommended by the Local Government and Environment Committee to clarify two clauses of the bill have been agreed to. 
The Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) authorises the Auckland Council to borrow in foreign currencies. To achieve and maintain a high credit rating the funding agency will not be able to lend disproportionately to one council. Therefore because of the Auckland Council’s size and its significant borrowing requirements it will need to continue some borrowing outside the agency. The bill addresses that issue. It effectively gives the Auckland Council the same access to foreign currency markets as other councils will be able to achieve indirectly through the funding agency. Like the funding agency the Auckland Council will carry out its foreign currency borrowing on a fully hedged basis avoiding any risk associated with currency movement. It is encouraging to see central and local government working together to achieve cost savings of this magnitude and savings that will ultimately benefit ratepayers. 
I take this opportunity to thank Local Government New Zealand and the funding agency steering group for all their hard work on this scheme. I particularly thank the president Lawrence Yule for his work and also the chief executive Eugene Bowen. I understand that the funding agency will be up and running either late this year or early next year so the benefits of the legislation to ratepayers will quickly become evident. Thank you.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Rugby World Cup Minister—Extension of Queens Wharf Fanzone 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Rugby World Cup Minister—Extension of Queens Wharf Fanzone 
[Volume:675;Page:21279] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received letters from the Leader of the Opposition and Dr Russel Norman seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the announcement that the Minister for the Rugby World Cup is to invoke powers under the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Act 2010 to take control of the Auckland waterfront for cup celebrations. Dr Norman’s application refers to the decision by the Minister to extend the Auckland Rugby World Cup fanzone beyond its current limits. No such decision has been made. 
In ruling on an urgent debate application the Speaker has to determine not when an announcement is made but when a particular case of recent occurrence occurs. The urgent debate procedure is a means of holding the Government to account for decisions that have actually been made. The grounds for an urgent debate today are not made out. 
However this is an important and controversial matter. There is a significant element of urgency. Where there is no other parliamentary means of debating an urgent matter in the reasonably foreseeable future this is a relevant consideration for the Speaker in considering whether a matter requires the urgent attention of the House. It may well give grounds for the matter to take precedence over other business. That stage has not been reached today but I am prepared to reassess tomorrow. The applications are declined.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:21275] 
10. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: What advice if any has she recently received on the value of the minimum wage relative to the cost of living? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
 on behalf of the Minister of Labour: I can reply that as part of the annual review of the level of the minimum wage she has received advice on a range of measures concerning the changing cost of living and wages here in New Zealand. 
Darien Fenton 
: How will her Government compensate minimum-wage workers when the annual increase in food prices of 6.6 percent in the August 2011 year has far outstripped the minimum-wage increase of 25c per hour which was delivered by her Government on 1 April 2011? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: As the member knows there is an annual process of consideration about what the minimum wage will be set at and the Minister will no doubt take that information into account in her consideration. 
Darien Fenton 
: Does she accept that the income of minimum-wage workers has declined in real terms by $16.80 a week since June 2010; if so will she take that into account in this year’s minimum-wage review and increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Since 2008 the Government has increased the minimum wage from $12 to its current level of $13 per hour. This is an increase of 8.3 percent which is in line with the CPI. I would reflect that that party opposite had 9 years while previously in Government in which to put the minimum wage up to $15. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Kia ora Mr Speaker. Kia ora tatou. Does the Minister agree with the proposals put to the Prime Minister by the Maori Party that lifting the minimum wage to $15 per hour would have a hugely positive effect on reducing child poverty and on the cost of living for many people; if not why not? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The Government is working every day to raise the living standards for all New Zealand families in the most difficult economic times for generations. Advice from the Department of Labour suggests that in fact the policy the member has described would have the opposite effect with the loss of more than 6000 jobs. 
Darien Fenton 
: What plans does her Government have to improve the situation for other wage-workers whose real income has declined under her Government with an average increase of just 1.9 percent in the past year compared with 5.3 percent inflation? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: This Government has a plan that will grow the economy and create more opportunities for New Zealanders by lowering taxes by investing in skills by making sure that infrastructure is boosted and by ensuring that science and innovation remain strong priorities for national investment.
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:21275] 
9. 
AARON GILMORE (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: Has the Government made any recent announcements on the Canterbury Temporary Accommodation Assistance Payment? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 The Temporary Accommodation Assistance payment provides financial support to homeowners affected by the earthquake who have dual housing costs while their homes are being rebuilt or repaired. It is for those who cannot access cover through other means such as insurance. We recognised that there needed to be more flexibility around the end date to support those homeowners most affected so we have made some changes. These changes will allow those eligible for the Temporary Accommodation Assistance payment to continue to receive support after the first Government deposit. 
Aaron Gilmore 
: Given that excellent announcement how can people apply for the Canterbury Temporary Accommodation Assistance payment? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: To apply information can be found at the Canterbury Earthquake Temporary Accommodation Service website which is www.quakeaccommodation.govt.nz. So far for the House’s information 195 homeowners have taken up the Temporary Accommodation Assistance payment with the average payment being around $280 per week which is costing the Government about $55000 a week in total. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: I seek leave to table a document which is in fact three emails. The first one is the follow-up from the cross-party forum where we asked for this change to be made. The second one is dated 19 August asking whether there has been any progress on a reply to the inquiry. The third one is dated 30 August saying that this is now urgent and we are getting increasing inquiries about this matter. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there an objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:21272] 
7. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What progress has been made in providing improved access to surgical specialist assessments over the last three years? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 First specialist assessments are the gateway to elective surgery and most diagnostic tests. I am pleased to advise the House that over the last 3 years the number of patients benefiting from first surgical specialist assessments has increased by 24000. This compares with an increase of just over 2000 over the term of the previous Government which meant that access in real terms was cut. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: What other progress is being made to such assessments? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Many patients are referred to a specialist in order to get a diagnostic test or scan like endoscopy or magnetic resonance imaging and this of course involves waiting to see the specialist who then refers the patient on to the test or scan. That is one of the reasons why under the Government’s “Better sooner more convenient care” policy in primary care we are progressively giving more general practitioners the ability to refer patients directly for a test or scan without having to go to the hospital to see the specialist first. This of course means less waiting and faster service and it also frees up specialist time to deal with other patients.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:675;Page:21341] 
Sittings of the House 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 Given the progress the House has made I seek leave for the House to now rise. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Urgent Debates Declined — Rugby World Cup Minister—Extension of Queens Wharf Fanzone 
Urgent Debates Declined — Rugby World Cup Minister—Extension of Queens Wharf Fanzone 
[Volume:675;Page:21279] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Rugby World Cup Minister—Extension of Queens Wharf Fanzone 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received letters from the Leader of the Opposition and Dr Russel Norman seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the announcement that the Minister for the Rugby World Cup is to invoke powers under the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Act 2010 to take control of the Auckland waterfront for cup celebrations. Dr Norman’s application refers to the decision by the Minister to extend the Auckland Rugby World Cup fanzone beyond its current limits. No such decision has been made. 
In ruling on an urgent debate application the Speaker has to determine not when an announcement is made but when a particular case of recent occurrence occurs. The urgent debate procedure is a means of holding the Government to account for decisions that have actually been made. The grounds for an urgent debate today are not made out. 
However this is an important and controversial matter. There is a significant element of urgency. Where there is no other parliamentary means of debating an urgent matter in the reasonably foreseeable future this is a relevant consideration for the Speaker in considering whether a matter requires the urgent attention of the House. It may well give grounds for the matter to take precedence over other business. That stage has not been reached today but I am prepared to reassess tomorrow. The applications are declined.
Henare Tau: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Henare Tau: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:21276] 
11. 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Tertiary Education 
: What action is the Government taking to ensure overseas-based student loan borrowers are meeting their repayment obligations? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Tertiary Education) 
: 
 We are expanding our successful debt-recovery programme which is a pilot programme in conjunction with the Minister of Revenue Peter Dunne to target a further 50000 debtors in Australia and the United Kingdom. This follows an Inland Revenue Department pilot that targeted around 1000 Australia-based loanholders which has in the past 10 months led to the recovery of more than $6.6 million. This extended campaign will see loanholders across those two countries contacted either directly or through their nominated contact person in New Zealand to pay the arrears or set up payment arrangements. Legal action will follow for cases of continued non-compliance. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: How do the repayments of overseas-based borrowers compare with those of New Zealand - based borrowers? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Most New Zealand - based borrowers comply with their repayment obligations. In fact the median repayment time for New Zealand - based borrowers after they leave tertiary study is just 4½ years compared with overseas-based borrowers at around 14 years. Student loan borrowers need to understand that if they choose to access the loan scheme they are also choosing to take on the responsibilities that come with it even if they head overseas. We remain committed to providing interest-free student loans so improving the repayment rate by overseas borrowers is a priority in order to deliver greater value for taxpayers who fund the student loan scheme.
Calder Cam: Local Government Borrowing Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
Calder Cam: Local Government Borrowing Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
[Volume:675;Page:21304] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take a small call on the Local Government Borrowing Bill and the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2). I acknowledge the work done by the Hon Rodney Hide in this area. 
There can be few of us in the House today who on receiving our rates bill have not shuddered as the rates bill seems to climb inexorably ever higher. Good local government is something we often take for granted but it is essential for the well-being of our communities our economy and our environment. The challenges facing local government contribute to the drive to ever higher council rates. Such rates rises are ultimately unsustainable and that is why this Government is committed to helping local councils to operate in a more cost-effective manner. This legislation allows for more cost-effective borrowing by local authorities. Through a cooperative approach to raising finance it is estimated that the New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency could save local councils approximately $25 million a year. This is good legislation it enjoys support as we have heard from across the House and I commend it to the House.
Bennett David: Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill — First Reading 
Bennett David: Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:21314] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I want to take a call on the Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill. It is a bill that Rodney Hide and the ACT Party have brought to this House. The objective of the bill is to limit the annual increase in core Crown expenses by linking them to the rate of inflation and the rate of population change. I note that the last Labour speaker on this bill Ruth Dyson made a big point about Government spending. Her issue was that Government spending had increased. Well it has increased and that is because we have had a recession and we have had an earthquake in Christchurch. So if Labour does not want to deal with the recession nor the earthquake then fine; we will tell the public of New Zealand that. But at this stage the New Zealand Government has dealt with those issues and dealt with them in an appropriate way. That is important for our economy and our country going forward. 
We look forward to this bill progressing through this stage of the House to the Finance and Expenditure Committee so that there can be further deliberations and so that the public has the ability to have their say with regard to this proposal. The objective once again of this bill is to limit the annual increase in core Crown expenses by linking them to the rate of inflation and the rate of population change. We look forward to the bill progressing through the House.
Goodhew Jo: Local Government Borrowing Bill — In Committee 
Goodhew Jo: Local Government Borrowing Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21178] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Local Government Borrowing Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Local Government Borrowing Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21179] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 65 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 4; Maori Party 3; United Future 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 7; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
Part 2 agreed to.
Hide Rodney: Local Government Borrowing Bill — In Committee 
Hide Rodney: Local Government Borrowing Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21171] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 I will reply to Mr Nash’s questions. I want him to appreciate the underlying principle here of the exemption of the funding agency to Part 5D of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act 1989 which is that local councils are exempt from Part 5D. So if they are exempt from Part 5D it would be odd to put a collective vehicle of local councils together and make it subject to Part 5D because that would hobble the thing relative to their raising their own money. The whole point is to keep the regulatory regime the same as if the funding agency was a council because effectively that is what it is. 
In terms of a council defaulting of course that debt would then be carried by the other councils. That is implicit in the nature of what is being proposed. In fact it is that collectivity of the debt that actually gives the advantages being sought. The thing I would point out is that I do not think we have any experience of a local council ever defaulting. If we think about that for a minute—a council in New Zealand has never defaulted. If we wrap up a vehicle that represents them all the chances of the funding agency defaulting are unimaginable in the New Zealand setting of financial regulation and management.