edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Goldsmith Paul; Hipkins ChrisHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you Mr Chair. Just going back to the part which refers to when a firearms protection order (FPO) might be made and new section 39A(2) in clause 8 which says The court may make a [firearms protection order] against an offender if the court is satisfied" about a whole bunch of things—"if the court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the imposition of an FPO is necessary reasonable and appropriate to assist in managing the risk that the offender poses to public safety." I suppose the question I have is to try and get into the mind and the intention of the Government in passing this because judges will be trying to decipher that I suppose when they make these decisions. If you took the example of somebody who had shot somebody else and perhaps killed them—or perhaps didn't kill them but tried to kill them—would it be the expectation of the Government in passing this bill that that person would get a firearms protection order placed against them? Can he think of anything that would make it not necessary or not reasonable or not appropriate for somebody in that circumstance to have an FPO brought against them or does he think it's possible that somebody could shoot to kill somebody and maybe have the desire not to shoot anybody else and therefore they're not a risk to the public? I'm not sure but I'd like to get a sense from the Minister of what the expectation is because he's chosen to draft a very light-touch provision which the court may if a whole bunch of things flow from that—and sometimes it would be useful just to get a sense of what his expectation would be in those examples that I gave for somebody that used a firearm to shoot and kill somebody else or to shoot and not kill somebody else but intended to or even if you took the example of somebody who just discharged a firearm recklessly for example. How high is the Government's expectation that these FPOs would be used and what is the intention that he and the Government have on this matter?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Police): The Government's expectation is that a firearms prohibition order will be put in place where it's necessary reasonable and appropriate and that ultimately is the decision of the judiciary. That is one of the fundamental premises—"premises" if that's the right language; it's probably not actually. That's one of the fundamental components of our current approach to law and order in New Zealand that we still rely on the judiciary to apply discretion and to apply judgment. In other jurisdictions where much of the discretion and judgment has been taken away from the judiciary they in fact have had to impose sentences and restrictions upon people that they themselves have said at sentencing they felt were disproportionate and that they disagreed with. Thankfully that's not a path that New Zealand has by and large gone down and this Government doesn't intend to start on it."
Hipkins ChrisHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Police): Can I thank the member for her very specific questions. In terms of the cross-referencing in the legislation that actually relates to the Three Strikes Legislation Repeal Bill that was just passed by the House and has yet to receive the Royal assent. It will receive the Royal assent before this bill does and therefore that makes changes to the relevant clauses in this bill effectively. It reorganises the way things are represented in the legislation that this bill amends. So this bill has had to be amended to reflect the amendments that the House has just passed. That's the reason why some of those cross-references are different now in this bill to the ones that were previously referenced.In terms of the earlier question around the fit and proper" person test I do think it's a very fair question. The fit and proper person test—the factors that are considered they're not hard and fast rules. So the fact that someone's had a firearms prohibition order (FPO) against them is something that the police or the person renewing or granting a firearms licence would consider. But it doesn't mean that the fact that they've had an FPO means that they're absolutely disqualified. It becomes a factor that can be considered in processing the licence application but it doesn't bar someone from having either a new licence or a licence renewal successfully processed. In terms of Mark Mitchell's question about the extent to which the legislation might be applied that will really come down to the courts. So if we look at the offences that it can be applied for—serious offences against the Arms Act serious violent offences including murder attempted murder conspiracy manslaughter discharging a firearm aggravated robbery and sexual violation offences with intent to cause harm or grievous bodily harm violent sexual offences strangulation suffocation terrorism offences and organised crime offences—that's a pretty extensive list. It covers quite a wide range of offenders and the extent to which the courts apply FPOs at this point is unknown.Obviously the police will make their views to the courts known about where they think that is justified. I think it would be too early to tell frankly how many people are likely to be the subject of FPOs at this point. Ultimately it will be up to the police to determine when they seek from the courts a firearms prohibition order to be applied."
McKee NicoleNICOLE McKEE (ACT): I too congratulate you Mr Chair on your appointment to the Chair.Minister I have a couple of questions I'd like to start off with and one of them is in regard to clause 7 where we're going to amend section 24A(1)(c)(ca) where those excluded from ever being fit and proper" to hold a firearms licence will include those people who have had a firearms prohibition order placed on them at some stage in their life.I read that Minister as not really being a 10-year penalty; it's a lifetime penalty. I wonder Minister whether you can speak to that and the intent and what proposals the Government foresees in the ability for someone who may be 30 years on from having a firearms prohibition order who wishes to hunt and gather for their family—would they be able to do so under the immediate supervision of a licensed firearms holder or would they be expelled from being able to do so at all?My second question to you Minister is in regard to clause 8 where we introduce new Part 7A specifically new section 39A(1)(a)(ii). Minister there has been a change where "serious violent offences" becomes "specified violent offences" and of course we were looking at section 86A of the Sentencing Act but I notice that your Supplementary Order Paper 212 now refers to section 4 in the Victims' Orders Against Violent Offenders Act 2014. Section 4 actually refers back to section 86A of the Sentencing Act.So I'm wondering if you could please clarify for those at home who don't understand why we're going around about the difference between the "specified" offence and the "serious" violent offence because that does mean quite a bit to those that are at home. I'll start off with those two. Thanks Minister."
Belich CamillaCAMILLA BELICH (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. One of the key functions of the judiciary is discretion in sentencing. The repeal of this law—the three-strikes law—will put the discretion back where it should be: with the judiciary. This is really important because the loss of liberty is one of the most serious sanctions we have as a society and it should not be entered into lightly.This three-strikes law has not worked. It has created distortion. It is not evidence-based. It has not reduced offending. It has created inconsistencies. It has created unfairness. It has not made our communities safer. It does not tackle the drivers of crime or as the previous speaker suggested protect victims. It is contrary to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. It creates disproportionality. As previous speakers have suggested—and it is true—it also predominantly affects and unfairly affects Māori. And—my most important point—it is unnecessary. Judges can always put the maximum sentence in place and that is why I commend this repeal bill to the House.
Williams ArenaARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Mr Speaker thank you and congratulations on your appointment to this role. This will be a short call from me and I am grateful to the Labour Government for passing this legislation imminently because I'm done with this conversation. I'm done with the conversation in this House which is mostly political posturing about a problem we all agree on: a problem of reducing crime on those that are most affected by it. And who are most affected by it? They are people who look and sound like me. In South Auckland Māori are 30 percent more likely to experience violent crime. Māori women make up 7 percent of the population but we experience 20 percent of the assaults. We've got to get serious about addressing crime and that's what this Government is doing. This window dressing that is three strikes does not solve the problem and I'm proud to be getting rid of it today.
Prime Willow-JeanWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour—Northland): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker Bennett and congratulations on your appointment to the role. It is a pleasure to take this first call before you—congratulations.I will only take a short moment. As a proud member of the Justice Committee and as the proud co-chair of the Māori caucus I support the repeal of this three-strikes legislation. Māori as the chair of our Justice Committee pointed out in her contribution are almost nine times more likely to receive a first strike than those of European or other ethnicities and over 18 times more likely to receive a second strike. In the advice that we received at the select committee the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court have found sentences imposed under the regime contravene the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act with Māori significantly overrepresented in the group of offenders who have received a strike. Twenty-three offenders have received a third strike 81 percent of whom are Māori. I commend this bill to the House. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon David Bennett): This is a split call.
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Mr Speaker for the opportunity to take a brief call. One thing I would agree on is that we do share a concern for community safety across this House but there is a difference: when it comes to that side of the House and justice and community safety issues that side are about reacting and often performing. On this side of the House we're about responding responsibly. Our response is based on the evidence including what occasionally the lack of evidence tells us about the effectiveness or not of policy. There is a lack of evidence here and that tells a story as well.I want to make one last point that has been made before: that the three-strikes regime never created harsher penalties. The bill today will not remove the ability of judges to put in place those tougher penalties when they are needed. We need judicial scrutiny because judges are the closest to the facts on the ground. They are also the ones who consider the views of victims. On this side of the House we believe that victims' views should be considered always. This is a much-needed repeal. I commend this bill to the House.
Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central): Point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave of the House to table a number of letters to members of the National Party various spokespeople pertaining to the rhetoric they have made about Auckland Central and the crime rates therein—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can you back it up?CHLÖE SWARBRICK: Yep. DEPUTY SPEAKER: How many letters?CHLÖE SWARBRICK: There's several of them noted to multiple spokespeople for the National Party addressing their rhetoric. I can table the very first from December. DEPUTY SPEAKER: OK there are a couple of things that are bothering me about that: one do all the recipients know that you are tabling them? Chlöe Swarbrick: The recipients have been made aware that there is every intention to make—DEPUTY SPEAKER: And they agree? Chlöe Swarbrick: I can seek that in writing. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well you do that first.
Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): The ACT Party would like to join with others in supporting this motion. I think it speaks to the greatness of our country—it shows that anyone can do anything. In hindsight Mr Speaker I think your own appointment was preconditioning for us to come to this day and we certainly look forward to seeing Greg O'Connor in the Chair. Thank you Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.Motion agreed to.
Appointments — Assistant Speakers
Bishop ChrisCHRIS BISHOP (National): Thank you very much Mr Speaker. We're delighted to support the nomination of Greg O'Connor as a temporary Assistant Speaker. I've come to know Mr O'Connor through his excellent performances in the Parliamentary Cricket Team and I'm sure that the skills he displays on the cricket field particularly his—I'm struggling for the right word here—great composure at long on and deep fine leg will serve him well in the committee of the whole House. Congratulations Greg.
Hipkins ChrisAssistant Speaker—Greg O'ConnorHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That this House appoint Greg O'Connor as Assistant Speaker until the House adjourns on Thursday 11 August 2022. Until that last motion was put before the House I didn't realise it was possible to turn a face mask red by blushing underneath it but David Bennett has managed to do just that! The House is I'm sure grateful to Greg O'Connor for also agreeing to step into a presiding officer role. Since he was elected in 2017 he's demonstrated a firm command of parliamentary rules and practices. No doubt his extensive experience as a police officer will also be of assistance to him in the role. SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.
Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I'm reminded of Shakespeare who told us that even a king may pass through the guts of a beggar and come out on the other side. I think the ACT Party is looking forward gleefully to this new experiment in our democracy. We think that David Bennett will make an excellent Assistant Speaker and Mr Speaker after you sir we can't wait to see how he goes.SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.Motion agreed to.
Bishop ChrisCHRIS BISHOP (National): Well it gives me great pleasure to speak to the motion moved by the Leader of the House. The Hon David Bennett is a long-serving member of this House first elected in 2005. He served as Minister for Racing and Food Safety and Veterans' Affairs in the past and had associate roles in immigration and transport. But I think it's in the area of the chairing of select committees that Mr Bennett has really made his mark on this House particularly through the chairing of the Finance and Expenditure Committee. I had the privilege of serving with Mr Bennett at that time as did the Hon Grant Robertson and he had to deal with the Hon Grant Robertson the Hon Clayton Cosgrove in fine fettle at the time. The Rt Hon—Hon Dr Megan Woods: Always—always.CHRIS BISHOP: —as always—Winston Peters was also on the committee. The leader of the ACT Party David Seymour was on the committee and the leader of the Greens James Shaw was on the committee and he had to deal with Andrew Bayly as well might I add. So he did an excellent job in chairing that committee and I'm sure that the skills that he learnt chairing the Finance and Expenditure Committee in that 2014 to 2017 Parliament will come in very handy as he chairs the committee of the whole House in this temporary albeit august role.
Hipkins ChrisAPPOINTMENTSAssistant Speaker—Hon David BennettHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I seek leave to move two motions without notice on the appointment of two Assistant Speakers. SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There appears to be none. Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I move That this House appoint Hon David Bennett as Assistant Speaker until the House adjourns on Thursday 11 August 2022.At the start of each Parliament the House elects a Speaker and appoints a Deputy Speaker and two Assistant Speakers. Because of COVID-19 late last year we added a third Assistant Speaker to the workforce. Today for various reasons all three of our Assistant Speakers are unavailable to attend the House. Two will remain so for the rest of the week so the House needs to fill these gaps so that it can continue to function properly particularly given that we've got a number of committee stages that will be progressed this week where we need those presiding officers. David Bennett is indeed one of our longest-serving members of Parliament having been elected since 2005 and has gallantly agreed to have his name put forward to be a temporary Assistant Speaker.
SpeechPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: No petitions have been presented. No bills have been introduced. Ministers have delivered papers. CLERK: Office of the Health and Disability Commissioner Statement of Performance Expectations 2022-2023New Zealand Film Commission Statement of Performance Expectations 2021-2022 and Annual Report 2020-2021.SPEAKER: Those papers are published under the authority of the House. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee on the international treaty examination of the revisions to the radio regulations adopted by the Final Acts of the World Radiocommunication Conference 2019report of the Environment Committee on the Petition of Tara Shepherdreport of the Governance and Administration Committee on the Statutes Amendment Billreports of the Petitions Committee on the petitions ofAva SimeonChained Dog Awareness NZ TrustChristine McCarthy andMichael Kampkes.SPEAKER: The bill on the international treaty examination is set down for consideration.
Ngarewa-Packer DebbieDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader—Te Paati Māori) (remote): Tēnā koe e te Pīka. Te Paati Māori supports this motion to congratulate the Aotearoa Commonwealth Games team for their outstanding achievements and record-breaking success at the Birmingham Commonwealth Games.Kā tū ahau hei tō whaea ki te whakanui ki tā tātou tīma i kōkiri i te mana o Aotearoa i ngā hākinakina o te ao.[As your aunt I would wholeheartedly like to celebrate our team who championed the prestige of New Zealand at the Commonwealth Games.]I want to begin by acknowledging all our sportspeople who competed at this year's Commonwealth Games.E mihi nui ki tā tātou whā tekau mā ono ngā kaipara ki ōu whakapapa.[A huge acknowledgment to our 46 athletes to your ancestry.]And those who have won medals during this campaign you all did us extremely proud. In particular I want to mihi to squash competitor Joelle King of Ngāti Porou who became Aotearoa's most-decorated female Commonwealth Games athlete picking up gold in the women's doubles and mixed doubles.Ka nui te mihi kei a koutou Ngāti Porou.[A huge acknowledgment to you Ngāti Porou.]For someone whose whānau wakes up early and takes our mokopuna to their sporting competitions every weekend it's truly inspiring to show them what is possible and we truly appreciate you all.Finally I want to mihi to their whānau communities and supporters who believed in them to get to this point and may you continue to inspire them in their up-and-coming future and may our Governments continue to invest more in sports to make all that happen. Nō reira tēnā tātou katoa.SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.Motion agreed to.
Motions — New Zealand Commonwealth Games Team 2022—Congratulations
SpeechDAMIEN SMITH (ACT): I rise on behalf of ACT as sports spokesperson and a most obvious and proud Kiwi. I'd like to congratulate on behalf of the party all of the 232 athletes we sent to the 2022 Commonwealth Games under the chef de mission Nigel Avery. The total haul was 20 gold medals 12 silver 17 bronze—that's 49 medals in total ranking fifth overall—and congratulations must go to the Indian community who pipped us to be fourth in the rankings.Ten of the gold medals were in cycling and as my colleague said it's great to see cycling taking off again and getting some positive recognition and a positive light considering past experiences. We got a few golds in swimming too and well done. And my other colleague Ricardo Menéndez March is right it was called the British Empire Games and it's great the Commonwealth Games were successful in Birmingham in 2022 and New Zealand did its bit. Next the games will be held in Victoria—the first games in history held in a decentralised way across four cities in Victoria from 17 to 29 March 2026 so let's all book our flights for that one.The ceremony included the handover of the Commonwealth Games flag to the Australians who are the next hosts and after a record-breaking games it was a pleasure to see Aaron Gate take on the role as the country's flagbearer. Gate won four gold medals at the games—three at the velodrome and one on the road. The New Zealand flag was held high. The 31-year-old Aucklander being named Te Pou Hapai the flagbearer was the icing on the cake of the successful games. Gate who also competed at Delhi in 2010 and Glasgow 2014 as well as the Tokyo and Rio Olympics follows in the footsteps of Joelle King and Tom Walsh who carried the flag at the opening ceremony.Congrats to all those involved especially the paralympians and on behalf of the ACT Party we think it is a wonderful event across those countries.
Menéndez March RicardoRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a privilege to rise on behalf of the Greens to congratulate Aotearoa's athletes who participated in the 2022 Commonwealth Games. I reiterate the very wholesome list of athletes presented by the previous speakers and just acknowledge their amazing work. As with the previous speakers I want to also acknowledge the athletes' family members and the support staff who were there for them and who are a core part of the team. It's been heartening to hear that athlete wellbeing was such a big focus for the New Zealand team in Birmingham and I hope that this emphasis continues in future games and in other spaces.It was also great to note the wide range of diversity represented in the games: 54 percent or 125 of our athletes were women which is the highest representation in New Zealand Commonwealth or Olympic history. The team members came from a wide range of cultural backgrounds including athletes from Samoa Tonga the Cook Islands Fiji the Philippines China and Australia and people from African heritage as well. There were 46 Māori athletes selected too. I also want to note that compared to the Olympics the Commonwealth Games are the only multisport event of their kind with an integrated parasport programme. I do hope that the Olympics and other multisport events move towards this approach in the future.I also want to reflect on the shared history of colonisation and dispossession of indigenous peoples that we have with so many other nations participating in the games. It was called the British Empire Games until the 1950s after all. But as we move forward I also think we can find solidarity with each other in the work that is happening across so many nations who are fighting for justice and healing from the harms of this shared history. I want to shout out to the activists the athletes and the indigenous groups who have long demonstrated during the games and aptly called them the Stolenwealth Games". I want to recognise that today is International Day of the World's Indigenous Peoples.Another aspect that I want to reflect on as part of this motion is how we can best ensure that the public has access to the broadcasts of the games in a way that is ethical and does not contribute to harm. I was somewhat disappointed to hear the Minister of Finance say on Morning Report this morning that he wanted to maintain the ability for broadcast sport—SPEAKER: Order! The member will come back to the motion please.RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH: Well I do think that for the wellbeing of our athletes and the sporting—SPEAKER: Order! The member will come back to the motion. There's another matter which is before the House at some stage in the future—it's not now. RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH: Ngā mihi. Well I will end then just putting a hearty congratulations to all the athletes and that we can all work together towards a better fairer Aotearoa. Thank you."
Rurawhe AdrianTUESDAY 9 AUGUST 2022The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSADRIAN RURAWHE (Deputy Speaker): E te Atua kaha rawa ka tuku whakamoemiti atu mātou mō ngā karakia kua waihotia mai ki runga i a mātou. Ka waiho i ō mātou pānga whaiaro katoa ki te taha. Ka mihi ki te Kuīni me te inoi atu mō te ārahitanga i roto i ō mātou whakaaroarohanga kia mōhio ai kia whakaiti ai tā mātou whakahaere i ngā take o te Whare nei mō te oranga te maungārongo me te aroha o Aotearoa. Āmene.[Almighty God we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests we acknowledge the Queen and pray for guidance in our deliberations that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom and humility for the welfare peace and compassion of New Zealand. Amen.]
Thursday 4 August 2022 - Volume 761
12. Question No. 12—EducationPENNY SIMMONDS (National—Invercargill) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 12—Education12. PENNY SIMMONDS (National—Invercargill) to the Minister of Education: Does Te Pūkenga have a detailed plan focused on the underlying financial issues facing some of its subsidiaries; if not why not?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): I'm advised that Te Pūkenga has a programme of action to reduce the deficit. Of course addressing the underlying financial viability of the vocational education sector is the purpose of the reform programme.Penny Simmonds: Does the Minister consider it is good practice that the financial sustainability of the Te Pūkenga operating model being consulted on from 15 August has not yet been determined?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: You generally determine something before you start to consult on it.Penny Simmonds: Thank you. Does the Minister think it is a fair tool or a blunt tool for the head office of Te Pūkenga to ask each subsidiary polytechnic for a 3 percent saving when some polytechnics will already be operating more efficiently than others?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: That is of course a matter for Te Pūkenga as to how it achieves financial viability and returns to surplus. I would note that almost all of the subsidiaries have experienced a decline in enrolments and particularly a decline in international students such that even those that were previously doing better financially are not in that same position now.Penny Simmonds: What concerns if any does the Minister have with the head office of Te Pūkenga asking subsidiary polytechnics to use high staff turnover as a cost-saving approach and isn't this approach high risk with the potential to leave polytechnics without essential key skills?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I reject the assertion in the member's question. It's not unusual for an organisation that is facing a significant deficit to effectively put in place a hiring freeze which is what Te Pūkenga has done.Penny Simmonds: Has the Minister signed off on Te Pūkenga paying for a chief executive an acting chief executive and an acting-acting chief executive when the acting chief executive travels overseas next month bearing in mind that the organisation is seeking to claw back a $110 million forecast deficit?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I think that's a somewhat cheap question as the member is well aware because she was told at the select committee yesterday the acting chief executive took on the role on the basis that he would take leave to attend the wedding of one of his children in the UK. I think attacking him for doing so when he was very clear when he took on the role that that's what he was going to do is pretty cheap.
9. Question No. 9—HealthSHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote) to the Associate Minister of HealthQuestion No. 9—Health9. SHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote) to the Associate Minister of Health: What announcement has the Government recently made about HIV?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Associate Minister of Health): On Saturday the Prime Minister and I launched the HIV Action Plan for consultation alongside $18 million of funding for the work. The HIV Action Plan outlines our plan to eliminate HIV transmission in Aotearoa New Zealand and ensure that people living with HIV enjoy lives that are healthy lives that are free from stigma and discrimination. HIV is a preventable infection and Aotearoa New Zealand is in a strong position to drastically reduce case numbers and eliminate HIV transmission by 2032. This is an ambitious but achievable aim.Shanan Halbert: How will the additional funding support the plan to eliminate HIV transmission?SHANAN HALBERT: The $18 million over four years from Budget 2022 for the HIV Action Plan gives us a very strong start towards the elimination of HIV. The draft action plan outlines four areas where we need to focus: surveillance systems to understand risk factors and populations; prevention and health promotion including greater use of pre-exposure prophylaxis enabled by the recent Pharmac decision to widen eligibility criteria; better access to testing and to care; and support for people living with HIV including addressing stigma and discrimination.Shanan Halbert: How will the HIV Action Plan deliver against Government objectives?Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: This Government is committed to support our diversity and to creating a New Zealand where all people feel safe have equal access to opportunities and do not experience discrimination yet one-third of people living with HIV have experienced stigma and discrimination as a result of their diagnosis. To eliminate HIV we need to fight this by targeting the disease not the individual. We will do this with our Te Tiriti obligations at the centre of our response to HIV and with a focus on human rights. This initiative builds on the Government's wider work to support rainbow communities like banning conversion therapy or making the health system more responsive to transgender people.
6. Question No. 6—Māori DevelopmentTĀMATI COFFEY (Labour) to the Minister for Māori DevelopmentQuestion No. 6—Māori Development6. TĀMATI COFFEY (Labour) to the Minister for Māori Development: What recent reports has the Minister seen on the Māori economy?Hon WILLIE JACKSON (Minister for Māori Development): I recently launched Te Matapaeroa 2020 which is Te Puni Kōkiri's published research on Māori business. The latest research identified 23300 Māori-owned businesses representing 8.8 percent of all businesses that there is data for in New Zealand for the year ending March 2020. This compares with about 10200 Māori-owned businesses in the earlier Te Matapaeroa 2019 report. The research also identified 38200 Māori sole traders representing 14.7 percent of all sole traders.Tāmati Coffey: According to the research what was the share of Māori-owned businesses with wāhine owners?Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Very encouraging results here: 39 percent of Māori-owned businesses had women—wāhine Māori—involved as an active shareholder compared to 1 percent of non - Māori-owned businesses. Māori-owned businesses were more diverse with 61 percent having at least one female owner of any ethnicity compared to 53 percent of non - Māori-owned businesses. Regardless of ethnicity Māori-owned businesses were more likely to have women both Māori and non-Māori as active shareholders.Tāmati Coffey: Were Māori-owned business with wāhine owners more likely to employ Māori?Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Overall Māori-owned businesses employ a higher percentage of Māori than non - Māori-owned businesses. When wāhine Māori were involved as shareholders this difference was amplified. In non - Māori-owned businesses Māori represent 14 percent of the workforce but in Māori-owned businesses with wāhine Māori owners Māori comprise 43 percent of the workforce. These results are very encouraging for Māori women because although Māori women are dragging in some of the statistics they're really coming to the fore in leadership areas—in the business area in the tribal area. It's a really good thing to see and I'm sure all parties would support that.Tāmati Coffey: What does Te Matapaeroa tell us about the importance of the Māori economy?Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Te Matapaeroa 2020 highlights the important role Māori-owned businesses play in the economy the rohe and in communities. This research has identified the importance of wāhine Māori talent as I said earlier in Māori-owned businesses and demonstrated how significant employers of Māori play an important role in employment in the regions. The new report reflects some encouraging trends in the wider contribution made by many Māori-owned businesses. Sharpening our understanding of the scale and make-up of the Māori economy will help us identify the untapped opportunities and need. In turn this will help improve equitable outcomes for Māori and enable whānau to thrive.
3. Question No. 3—EducationCAMILLA BELICH (Labour) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 3—Education3. CAMILLA BELICH (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What support has the Government contributed to help schools to provide learning environments for their students that are warm dry and fit for purpose?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Since 2018 the Government has committed $3.8 billion in new capital funding to improve school property up and down the country. That includes funding for the National Education Growth Plan to build new schools and classrooms to keep up with the growing population the National School Redevelopment Programme to address the very poor conditions some school buildings were in when we inherited them and the school investment programme which provided funding to nearly every State school in New Zealand to bring forward and complete much-needed property projects. To provide a comparison over $5.7 billion has been spent on upgrading and expanding school properties between 2018 and 2022 compared to $2.9 billion in the five years preceding that.Camilla Belich: How many property projects managed by the Ministry of Education are currently being undertaken across New Zealand?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Heaps. As of August there are 313 Ministry of Education - led property projects in construction across New Zealand. That includes 77 learning-support property modifications nine new schools eight new school expansions 124 redevelopments 38 redevelopments that also involve roll-growth projects and 57 roll-growth projects. We've invested in the capability of the Ministry of Education to manage these projects and as a result schools up and down the country are getting a better deal and better property.Camilla Belich: What has been delivered in terms of redevelopments and additional student places from this spending?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: When we became the Government we had a serious issue with school overcrowding in some areas because the investment in capital had not kept up with the roll growth. Through the National Education Growth Plan 27298 additional student places have already been delivered through the building of schools and classrooms and that's as of June of this year—1926 of those were delivered in the last quarter alone. One of the highlights was the opening of the new Scott Point School in Auckland for 650 students. That was funded in Budget 2018. Since 2019 we've fully completed 62 major redevelopment projects worth over $460 million—around half of these were in the last year. We are making really good progress in making sure that schools have the classrooms they need and they have the facilities they need to provide kids with the education they deserve.
1. Question No. 1—Building and ConstructionGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu) to the Minister for Building and ConstructionORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Building and Construction1. GREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu) to the Minister for Building and Construction: What recent reports has she received on competition in the market for residential building supplies?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister for Building and Construction): Mr Speaker kia orana. This morning the Commerce Commission released their draft market study into residential building supplies. The report indicates New Zealanders are not getting a fair deal on some key residential building supplies. While the Government has already driven improvements in the sector the Commerce Commission's draft review finds that changes are needed to make it more competitive. The commission has pointed to a few areas of specific concern that may be impeding competition including the building regulatory system the use of quantity-forcing rebates by building suppliers and restrictive land covenants. The report ties in very well with both the plasterboard task force work and the building consent system review currently under way to modernise the system by ensuring it is faster more efficient and flexible.Greg O'Connor: Why did the Government ask for this market study from the Commerce Commission?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: We asked the Commerce Commission to undertake the market study because of longstanding concerns about potential competition issues and the draft report confirms there are issues that need to be addressed and explored further. With warm dry affordable housing underpinning so many other social economic and health outcomes and given population growth and an increase in building consents over the last decade to over 50000 houses per year it's vital consumers get the best deal. We had a sense that there was work to be done to improve competition and outcomes for New Zealanders and that's why we committed to delivering this building supplies market study as a key Labour Party manifesto commitment.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before the next supplementary that was actually enough answer for two questions but—a bit more concise.Greg O'Connor: What is the remaining process for the Commerce Commission's market study into the residential building supplies?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The process from here is the commission will be seeking feedback on those preliminary recommendations and I encourage everybody to input into the process via the Commerce Commission's website. Consultation on the draft report is open for four weeks and closes on Thursday 1 September. The commission's final report will be released by 6 December 2022 with final recommendations informed via the consultation process. The Government will then consider those final recommendations.
Rurawhe AdrianANGELA ROBERTS (Labour): Kia orana Mr Speaker. It is my privilege to stand and take the final call on the Firearms Prohibition Orders Legislation Bill this afternoon. I just want to start by acknowledging the work of the Justice Committee and in acknowledging that work—noting that we aren't delivering nothing as has been suggested by the other side of the House—we're actually delivering more than went to the select committee. I love the select committee process. There is an opportunity for people who will be affected by legislation or by bills to come and share their views and their knowledge with the members of the select committee and to have an impact and this is a bill that has been impacted.The select committee heard the support from advocates for people who support those who are vulnerable to family and intimate partner violence—organisations such as Business and Professional Women New Zealand Women's Refuge and Rural Women New Zealand. They have an obvious view about the potential to improve protection for these people and they were heard. Of course we've already heard today in the House about the most significant change with the addition to the bill of the 41st qualifying offence with the strangulation and suffocation acknowledgment. I think it's significant. We've heard a lot about shootings and all of the stuff that hits the headlines and I just want to acknowledge the gun violence that doesn't hit the headlines which is that which is tangled up with our family and intimate partner violence. I just want to reflect for a moment on the Rural Women's submission and they talked about our rural women. I live in a rural community—I don't live in Auckland. I live in a rural community and my neighbours quite legitimately have guns because they use them in their daily working lives and they use them for recreational purposes. We are surrounded by guns but we are also isolated and our rural women are more vulnerable than most when we have incidents of gun violence.Our rural women are also the ones who step in to our communities to support or organise support for those who are impacted. So I just want to acknowledge the additional complexities for my neighbours and how this bill especially as it has come back to the House will strengthen the support for those vulnerable people.It is great to hear from the other side of the House that actually we do have support for this bill and I think that's really important. Voices of our vulnerable New Zealanders have been heard and it is because of this that I commend this bill to the House.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is That the amendments recommended by the Justice Committee by majority be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.
Firearms Prohibition Orders Legislation Bill — Second Reading
Williams ArenaARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe. Meitaki maata Mr Speaker. Let me first start by acknowledging my colleague Greg O'Connor but also the Hon Mark Mitchell; it's always good to have the contributions of the retired police officers in this House on these police matters. In the hurly-burly of the debate between them and between other members we might have forgotten what they said—my colleague Greg made the point very clearly and if you listened to the Hon Mark Mitchell he made it too—that this House agrees and there is consensus around a great deal of this legislation.But for the punters at home they might have missed it let me tell you what we do agree on. These firearms prohibition orders (FPOs) will be court orders that are designed to prohibit those who have been convicted and sentenced of previous serious criminal offences from possessing accessing or using firearms and related items like ammunition. Those remain in force for 10 years after sentences are served. I put stress on that because something that's been lost in this debate is how tough those measures are. There's a balance to be struck here by this Government and we have landed here but those provisions that require warrantless searches—and the Government is introducing warrantless search measures here—for people who have already served their sentences for offences 10 years ago it's a really stringent measure for getting more powers to the police when they've said they need them.Why we have had some hurly-burly in the debate is around this point. We've called it warrantless searches but actually on both sides of the House we agree that warrantless search is required here. On this side we say that police should have a reasonable suspicion that someone who is subject to these orders up to 10 years after they have served their sentence should be reasonably expected to be associating with someone or be in a property or be in a car with firearms which they are not allowed to be. In that situation we would expect that police actually carrying out these warrantless searches would also probably expect that they needed to have some reasonable suspicion that they're not out there searching every single person they see who is subject to a firearms protection order. Police at the Justice Committee made that point very clearly. When the Hon Mark Mitchell said that officials didn't give us a clear answer there was a very clear discussion at the committee about that being the appropriate balance that police were recommending from a policy perspective.I thank everyone around the House for what has been a very charged and interesting debate. I'm glad that we've reached consensus on this and I commend the bill to the House.
SpeechDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Kia orana Mr Speaker. It is a real pleasure to stand up and help to progress the next bit of the tranche of work that this Government is doing to make New Zealand a safer place. We've already had speakers reference the tragedy that brought us to this place where we have now got a defined work stream and I am really pleased to be here as a member of the Justice Committee to discuss this particular part of that work. As a wider scheme within what we have done we have already seen 60000 semi-automatic military-style assault guns removed from the community.Nicole McKee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The current speaker Emily just referred to 60000 military-style semi-automatics that have been removed.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): That's not a point of order; that's a debating point.Nicole McKee: Well it's incorrect.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): None the less not a point of order.Dr EMILY HENDERSON: I stand corrected. Many many military-style semi-automatic and bad bad guns have been removed from the community alongside I believe over 1000 guns removed by Operation Tauwhiro as part of this Government's extra resourcing of organised crime police units in this country alongside the fact that we now have more police on the street through this Government than there have ever been before.This bill enables us to get guns out of the hands of those whose criminal history shows a serious risk of further violent offending. It is a real matter of pleasure to me that we were able to recommend and the Government has adopted the inclusion of the domestic violence offense of strangulation which of course was brought into the law by this Government—another instance of Labour doing the work—in 2018 and that has been recognised in this bill as yet another serious violent offence raising the risk of public safety and thus it is in. At the same time we have clarified and strengthened the protections in making sure that courts have to be careful when they impose additional conditions and we were extremely grateful for the advice of New Zealand Police that there is no need in this bill to extend to warrantless search powers.It is also a matter of concern when you are talking about this sort of legislation that we get the balance between rights and protection for the community correct. In this case I believe we have done that and I commend this bill to the House with the one further comment that I believe the Dickens novel of the day for Mr Mitchell in particular is Miss Havisham—the person who was always the bridesmaid and never the bride because they tried three times and we got it done. Thank you.
Rurawhe AdrianPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSDEPUTY SPEAKER: A petition has been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.CLERK: Petition of Brian Borland requesting that the House repeal drug prohibition take responsibility for supplying drugs to users and decriminalise drug use.DEPUTY SPEAKER: That petition stands referred to the Petitions Committee. Ministers have delivered papers.CLERK: Te Māngai Pāho statement of performance expectations 2022-23Te Hiringa Mahara statement of performance expectations 2022-23 and statement of intent 2022-26 andTakeovers Panel annual report 2021.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Those papers are published under the authority of the House. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Primary Production Committee on the petition of Shengjun Jin andreport of the Regulations Review Committee on the examination of COVID-19 Orders presented between 1 and 14 July 2022.DEPUTY SPEAKER: The report of the Regulations Review Committee is set down for consideration. The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of bills.CLERK: Housing Infrastructure (GST-sharing) Bill introduction.Prohibition on Seabed Mining Legislation Amendment Bill introduction.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Those bills are set down for first reading.