edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Luxton JoJO LUXTON (Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee): Thank you Mr Chair. It's a pleasure to rise and take a call as the chair of the Primary Production Committee. I'd just like to acknowledge my fellow committee members; we are a great committee very collegial and we get some really good work done. This year we looked at the fisheries appropriations. The total appropriations this financial year are $82.6 million. It's estimated to be 13.7 percent less than the estimated actual expenditure of 2021 and 2022 and $65.4 million is to inform assist direct and enforce adherence to fisheries laws. We heard from the Minister about this. We spoke to the Minister about several things. We questioned him about changes to fisheries enforcement and monitoring funding for research and development marine protected areas frequency of fisheries stock assessment the risk of ecosystem shifts and increasing cost of marine fuel. When we asked the Minister what he expected the outcomes to be for the $65.4 million that was going to be going into enforcement and monitoring he felt that it would improve compliance and that would largely be through the introduction of cameras on fishing vessels. He noted that was something that would likely be able to happen through the Fisheries Amendment Bill that was actually before the select committee at that time. Cameras on fishing vessels has come about through successive work by the last few Governments wanting to make that happen. So that's a really positive thing that we heard from the Minister.Regarding the funding for research and development the committee noted that despite there being funding available there didn't seem to be a lot that was put in to research and development. The Minister actually agreed with that and said that he felt that there was enormous potential to increase profits by being more resourceful with fishing catch and that new technologies would actually be key to increasing productivity and reducing environmental harm from fishing. We've heard as I said that the Minister was happy with the frequency of fishing stock assessment even though it had reduced from around 200 days a year to 60. So all in all we heard just a few things from the Minister. The fisheries we feel is going to be in really good shape. I just want to acknowledge the Minister and the officials and the clerks of the select committee who put a lot of time and work into preparing these reports for us. Thank you Mr Chair.
Parker DavidHon EUGENIE SAGE (Green): Thank you very much Mr Chair. The Minister is responsible for the Rangitāhua/Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill. Vote Conservation allocates $1.86 million over four years for progressing that bill. So is there any prospect of the bill being progressed and having the sanctuary established in the current financial year given that $345000 has been allocated to that or does the fact that the funding has been allocated until 2025-26 mean that we won't get a sanctuary until then? What recent discussions has he had with mana whenua Ngāti Kuri and Te Aupōuri about the sanctuary and is it correct that the agreement that the Minister and his officials may have negotiated with Te Ohu Kai Moana may not be accepted by mana whenua—my first question. And then in terms of the south-east Otago marine protected area network public consultation on that finished in August 2020. There were two rounds of consultation under the Marine Reserves Act. There was also a quite diverse stakeholder group which consulted the public and provided its recommendations. So why some two years later has there been no announcement about the establishment of new marine protected areas? What are the barriers to their establishment and when does the Minister expect to announce any progress?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for Oceans and Fisheries): Look Mr Speaker I don't mind answering these questions but those are Vote Fisheries. Are we having this debate together?CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Yes yes—just for the information members these debates will be held together.Hon DAVID PARKER: Thank you. In respect of Rangitāhua or Kermadecs the member asks when I last spoke with northern iwi Te Aupōuri Ngāti Kuri and a third whose name I forget—I apologise for that forgetfulness. In fact I've spoken with representatives of all three iwi in the last week. When would have been the last time I spoke with them? Probably with two of the three I would have spoken with them during the prior month. Have I spoken with other parties? Yes including Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. Is there a prospect of this being finalised this year? That's possible. Is it certain? No. I think that answers that question.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): I'll give the call to Jo Luxton. Just as a consequence of explaining that the Minister's two portfolios will be heard together it's appropriate that the chair of the Primary Production Committee have a call.
SpeechEnvironment and Oceans and FisheriesCHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Good evening members. When we broke for the dinner break we were debating the Estimates. We now have the Minister for the Environment and for Oceans and Fisheries. The Minister is available from 7 p.m. until 8 p.m.
Robertson GrantHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I'm very happy to respond to the member in regard to the Business Growth Fund which is a little bit more than $56 million; $100 million is the contribution that the Government is planning to make. This based on very similar funds around the world. The UK and Australia are the two models that we've looked closely at; the UK one in particular has been very successful in ensuring that small businesses can keep going.It's not just the funding; the business growth fund in the UK also has linked to it the provision of support in terms of how to grow a business—so for example people being seconded on to the boards or the governing bodies of small businesses as well as access to patient capital.The critical involvement of the Government is to crowd in the retail banks. I think I said on Budget day that there was still a bit of work to do with the banks to get them to fully agree and sign up—but it's completely untrue to claim that they don't know anything about it. I've met and spoken to I think the chief executive of every major bank in New Zealand on this subject. The Reserve Bank is doing its work—Andrew Bayly: Any commitments?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: —and there has been a very solid level of commitment to keep talking to us about how this will work. So I did say that there would be more work required but that doesn't mean that we have to have some completely fully formed perfect idea before we even talk about it. It's an exciting prospect and I'm sure banks will want to be involved in it.I'll also point out to the member that there's been a significant amount of other support for small businesses including the Small Business Cashflow Loan Scheme the work that IRD's done in terms of supporting people with various taxation requirements and obviously the wage subsidy scheme itself.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. The House will resume at 7 p.m. Thank you.Sitting suspended from 6.03 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Estimates Debate — Finance
Watts SimonSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I appreciate a little bit of time to go. But I've got a question leading off from Nicola Willis's questions in regards to Labour's unsustainable deficits and in effect a Government living beyond its means.The interest costs bill for the debt of this Government at the moment is in the region of $2.8 billion that is slightly more than the entire police budget of $2.45 billion forecasted by the end of 2025 to be in the region of $4.9 billion which for context's sake is the same amount that we spend on the entire Vote Health and urban development of $4.6 billion or on the defence budget of $4.9 billion.My question Minister is quite simply: is he concerned that one of the fastest-growing Government spending programmes is the repayment of Government debt? Because I think that is a significant concern and for those people out in the public looking and saying well look the more we spend on the repayment of Government debt is less money available to spend on front-line services.My second question is around the fact that—is the Minister concerned with the fact that the Government repayment of debt is going to be one of the fastest-growing areas of Government spending. The implication on that is a reduction in the ability to be able to spend on front-line services such as teachers police and our healthcare workforce.Lastly in the interests of time I want to ask a question in regards to three waters which is a significant element of Government expenditure. I want to know from the Minister of Finance whether he believes the nearly $3 billion that has been allocated to local government for the three waters no worse off" funding is good value for money? The context for that is that part or a portion of that payment in Auckland $127 million was utilised to repay an operating deficit from a prior period. It didn't lead to one single metre of water pipe going into the ground in that country and I'm sure that is probably a joint concern for both of us."
Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. I'd like to return to a response to the Minister of Finance that I wished I could have made immediately after his call. He asked what is the—Hon Grant Robertson: Point of order Madam Chair. I regard the comment that the member has just made as challenging the ruling that you made. I did actually witness briefly what occurred up here.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you. The member will withdraw and apologise.David Seymour: I withdraw and apologise. I'm simply stating that I think—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): No. No. The member will resume his seat.David Seymour: Point of order. It may be the Minister of Finance's view and it may be that he doesn't want to hear more from me but you don't even know what I was going to say.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The member will leave the Chamber.David Seymour withdrew from the Chamber.
Willis Nicola; Robertson GrantNICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National): A simple question: does the Minister appreciate that supporting the independence of the Reserve Bank does not preclude assessing its performance? When he quotes the Reserve Bank's least-regrets approach does he as the Minister of Finance acknowledge any regret for the massive house-price inflation that resulted from the stimulus the 32-year highs in consumer price inflation that resulted and the large impact on families communities and ultimately the financial stability of the New Zealand economy that resulted and if he does not have any regrets at all does he acknowledge that some people do and a review is warranted? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): In answer to first part of the member's question the Reserve Bank has a board and the Reserve Bank board has a responsibility to oversee the operations of the bank. The independence remains important to me. I think that New Zealand has been well served by having an independent central bank. We did a review of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act and out of that we did make some alterations. That included moving to a monetary policy committee. It included creating a more conventional board structure and I'm sure that at certain points in the life of the Reserve Bank in the future they may well choose to use that. I've already indicated that I have a belief previously—and not just today—that there will be a time when there will be a comprehensive review of the Government's COVID response. That time will not be when we are still dealing with the outbreak that we're dealing with now. In terms of the second part of the member's questions around questions of regret we do not get to govern in hindsight and I know that the Opposition spokesperson is now a disciple of hindsight economics but actually we are not in a position to do that. So as I said in an earlier contribution did we get absolutely everything right in our response? Of course we didn't—no Government in the world did and indeed I'm sure that if the central bank governor was speaking he would say the same thing about monetary policy. But I think what we did get right—what we did get right—was that we moved quickly to support New Zealand households and businesses. We moved quickly to fund our health system properly. We entered into a vaccine roll-out programme that was among the most successful in the world albeit there were problems about the pace that people worried about but in the end the outcome of it—the number of people vaccinated—was a success. We moved to make sure that those vulnerable families had money. We supported numerous organisations around New Zealand to make sure that there was food security for our people during this period of time. We made sure that we ran public health programmes that helped people understand what they could do as well. So the money that we spent was spent to make sure that New Zealand got through a one-in-100-year health shock and the prospect of a one-in-100-year economic shock. That is a least-regrets policy and it's one that I stand by.
Willis Nicola; Robertson GrantNICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National): In light of that answer in which he points to the Reserve Bank's responsibility for decision making about the sheer volume of money-printing and his earlier comment that it is difficult to quantify the counterfactual why won't the Minister support an inquiry into the Reserve Bank's response and whether or not it was appropriately scaled to the challenges in our economy? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): This cuts to what I think is the heart of perhaps what's now emerging as a difference of opinion between the Government and the Opposition which is that the operation of monetary policy does need to be independent and I think New Zealand has had enough of a history to know the dangers of diverting from that level of independence. There will no doubt—as I've said on numerous occasions—be the opportunity that will come for an inquiry into the broader COVID response both from the economic perspective but also from the health perspective as well and the time will be right for that. The time is not right for that in the middle of while we are still dealing with a COVID outbreak in the middle of winter. When it comes to the question of the way in which the Reserve Bank might consider this the Reserve Bank has a board. The Reserve Bank operates independently from the Government and I am not about to undo that consensus even though the member might have some political mileage that she thinks she can make out of this. There will be the opportunity to do this. Nicola Willis: Oh not allowed to ask questions. Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: There is the opportunity to do this. Well it's interesting that the member says that because I do note that the member has had more than a dozen opportunities over the course of the last two years to question the Reserve Bank Governor and many opportunities to question me as select committee as well. So the idea that somehow or other this approach has had no scrutiny is absolute nonsense. It has had extraordinary amounts of scrutiny. The member has also noted where New Zealand positions itself. Every central bank in the world had to deal with this issue and every central bank in the world did undertake this kind of quantitative easing or unconventional monetary policy. That is something that should be recognised in this debate—that actually the Reserve Bank of New Zealand while it had to go earlier and harder than some others may have gone was part of a global consensus in this regard.
Willis Nicola; Robertson GrantNICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National): Did the Minister consider at the time he signed off on the extraordinary indemnity the possibility that significant money printing to the tune of $54 billion could potentially through flooding money supply into the New Zealand economy impact on inflation?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Firstly any decisions we took around the question of an indemnity were based on the advice that we get. But in the end the Minister of Finance is responsible for those decisions. The advice that I received from the Treasury was that an indemnity was justified. The way in which the Reserve Bank's finances appear on the Government's balance sheet mean that in a sense we're moving money from one part of the balance sheet to the other but obviously there's a marginal cost caused by being involved in the secondary bond market. When we did do this we considered all of the options both on the positive and the negative side. I repeat what I've just said to the member: when we were doing this we were facing the prospect of double-digit unemployment we were facing the prospect of economic activity slowing significantly. Had the Reserve Bank through its monetary policy or indeed the Government through its fiscal policy failed to act and had we seen a much-deeper impact on the New Zealand economy I'm quite sure that the member would be raising her concerns about that right now.Ultimately the decision about how to use the tools for which an indemnity were granted fall to the Reserve Bank and the Reserve Bank made those decisions. The granting of the indemnity from my part was based on the fact that I wanted to make sure that monetary policy was in a position to play its role. The final decisions about the amount of money and the various impacts that that would have fall to the Reserve Bank.
Edmonds BarbaraBARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana): I rise as the Chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee to recommend to the House that the appropriations for the year beginning—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! I'm trying to determine what is the best course to proceed because in my view we as a House have been set an almost impossible task of fitting in a strict time frame which actually doesn't fit the Order Paper. So I'm trying to figure out the best way to proceed. The only way I can proceed is that now we have the availability of the Minister of Finance who will be with us until 6 o'clock. So now I just have to say a few words.We now come to—well I've said we have the Minister of Finance. And I now give the call.
Menéndez March RicardoRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Just a very brief contribution instead of questions. Just picking up on the use of sanctions and the Minister's comment regarding them being a tool to get people to engage with the welfare system. I just wondered whether the Minister thinks it's effective to effectively deprive someone of their basic income to get them to engage and whether she thinks that there could be other interventions? The feedback on the ground has been that—and as a former welfare advocate on the ground—when people are not engaging with Work and Income there may be other underlying issues such as transient housing and ill mental health. I just wondered whether the use of a sanction as a tool to get people to engage actually could be having perverse outcomes such as just worsening people's mental health or transient housing. The second question was: whether she would consider the warrant-to-arrest sanction an excessive sanction considering the lack of—I can see the Minister being slightly distracted but just want to know if the warrant-to-arrest sanction is an excessive sanction in her view?
Estimates Debate — Social Development and Employment / ACC
Chhour Karen; Sepuloni CarmelKAREN CHHOUR (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. Minister I just want to ask a few questions around some written question responses. So in response to one written question the Minister informed me that the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has not commissioned any research into why people are becoming long-term beneficiaries since 2012. In a response to another she informed me that MSD is not centrally recording the reasons why so many work-ready job seekers have been receiving a benefit for a year or more. To a third question she informed me that there is no central recording of the highest education level received by beneficiaries. So my question is: does she think we may get better value for money out of the benefit system if we recorded relevant data and analysed it rather than relying on research from the 1990s and 2000s and do you have any plans to change the kind of data you are receiving?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development and Employment): Thank you to the member for those questions. I think that with respect to the specific questions I can't recall them off the top of my head to be honest. However in many ways some of the rationales for long-term welfare receipt wouldn't have changed; the complexity of the people's problems will remain the same. I think that's pretty fair to say. One of the issues I will say with regards to data is that our system is a very old system. I've spoken about this before. It's almost like operating a Commodore 64 in a digital age and even people that maybe worked at the Ministry of Social Development 20 years ago are shocked to see that the same system is still being used. Hon Members: SWIFTT.Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: What's it called again?Hon Members: SWIFTT.Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: SWIFTT. It is the same system. How long was that used for? Terisa Ngobi: It's a dinosaur.Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: It's a dinosaur. So there was some money in this year's Budget to start us on a bit of a business transformation pathway. The reasons for that are so that we can ensure that we're able to get the data as quickly and accurately and effectively as I think that member would like to see us get it. At the moment what happens is a lot of it sticks on individual client records and there's no kind of broader 2022-kind-of-way of being able to then utilise that data to inform things. So that's certainly the case. The other reason for needing to do that though is not just for reporting and data's sake; it's actually so that we can make access to the welfare system more seamless for people that are needing to use it or are in it. That would include perhaps if we had a better system being able to avoid the level of debt that comes from overpayments and what not. So there are multiple reasons why we do need to go along a pathway of business transformation particularly with regards to our IT systems. I'm really glad that we saw some money to start the ball rolling on that work in the 2022 Budget.
Upston Louise; Sepuloni CarmelHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Thank you Madam Chair. I entirely agree with the Minister that the focus of the welfare system should be to support people to fulfil their potential which is why I continue to be concerned about the very conscious decision that I have in written question answers about the focus on those either not on benefit or up to three months as opposed to those long term on benefit. And I want to ask the question of the Minister in terms of the programmes and initiatives that are funded in the employment and social outcomes support area rather than more generally in benefit payments. Specifically whether or not the consideration has been given to the length of time that a young person if they go on to a benefit under the age of 20 will spend on a benefit whether focused efforts could have been prioritised in that area. And also ask a question about what preventative initiatives have been funded in Budget 2022/23 which is of course what we are debating in this appropriations debate to reduce the number of children being raised in benefit-dependent homes which at the moment sits at one in five.Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development and Employment): A range of things in there again. One of the best initiatives I think that we have actually reinvested in that will avoid our children being raised in homes where they are reliant on a benefit is actually reinstating the Training Incentive Allowance that was cut by the previous Government. It's one of those initiatives where the science backs it—if we support women in particular because the vast majority of them are women that take up that particular support to upskill and train particularly with higher-level degree or higher-level qualifications not only do we increase the chances of that woman being able to get a job where she is able to increase her earning capacity but the science also tells us that it is more likely that there will be a positive impact on those children's academic performance as well. So it's one of those science evidence-based initiatives that we have invested in and it's something that I'm very proud of. And we're seeing great results—I announced that in the last two quarters we're nearly seeing 3000 take up the Training Incentive Allowance that we've reinvested in. And I think that in the next couple of weeks we'll be able to announce some even better numbers.
SpeechESTIMATES DEBATEIn CommitteeCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The House is in committee for the consideration of the Appropriation (2022/23 Estimates) Bill. The Standing Orders provide for 11 hours of debate on the Estimates and the Business Committee has determined to organise the debate by portfolio so there will be no sector-specific debates. All Votes are available for debate but only specific Ministers will be available each day to speak to the indicated portfolios only. The Government has indicated that the Minister for Social Development and Employment and for ACC the Minister of Finance and the Minister for the Environment and for Oceans and Fisheries will be available today.Each debate will be led by a call from the chairperson or member of the committee that considered the Estimates most closely related to the Minister's portfolio. This debate expires after 11 hours at which point questions will be put that the Votes stand part of the schedules and on the provisions of the Appropriation (2022/23 Estimates) Bill.The time for the debate has been allocated to parties on a proportional basis and may be taken as parties see fit during the debate. New Zealand Labour has five hours 57 minutes New Zealand National has three hours and two minutes the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand has 55 minutes ACT New Zealand has 55 minutes and Te Paati Māori has 11 minutes.The Estimates debate should be relevant to the Government's current spending plans as contained in the Estimates of Appropriations. A compendium of reports of select committees on the Votes is available on the Table. The question is that the Votes contained in the Estimates of Appropriation for 2022/23 stand part of the schedules.
SpeechHOUSE IN COMMITTEESPEAKER: I declare the House in Committee for consideration of the Appropriation (2022/23 Estimates) Bill the Overseas Investment (Forestry) Amendment Bill and the Oversight of Oranga Tamariki System and Children and Young People's Commission Bill.
Speaker's Rulings — Written Questions—Overdue Responses
Visitors — Latvia—Foreign Minister
SpeechPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: No select committee reports have been presented. No bills have been introduced. Petitions have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.CLERK: Petition of Laura Williams requesting that the House acknowledge that adult ADHD is a worthy concern and increase funding for it petition of Aaron Hendry requesting that the House stop the Oversight of Oranga Tamariki Billpetition of Nigel Woodley requesting that the House urge the Government to establish an Embassy in the State of Israel.SPEAKER: Those petitions stand referred to the Petitions Committee. Ministers have delivered papers.CLERK: Crown Irrigation Investments Ltd statement of performance expectations 2022/23Animal Control Products Ltd statement of corporate intent 2023-2025Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency statement of performance expectations 2022/23.SPEAKER: Those papers are published under the authority of the House.
Hipkins ChrisSITTINGS OF THE HOUSEHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That the sitting of the House today be extended into the morning of Thursday 11 August for the second reading of the Maniapoto Claims Settlement Bill further consideration in committee of the Overseas Investment (Forestry) Amendment Bill and the Oversight of Oranga Tamariki System and Children and Young People's Commission Bill and the second reading of the Screen Industry Workers Bill.
Seymour DavidSPEAKER'S RULINGSWritten Questions—Overdue RepliesSPEAKER: It has come to my attention that replies to 24 written questions from Dr Shane Reti to the Minister of Health are overdue some by as much as three weeks. I accept that this is a busy portfolio with over 2000 written questions replied to this year and there is a process of change in the administrative arrangements; however not answering questions on time is an abuse of the written question process and does not uphold the requirements for Ministers to account to this House for the offices they hold. As a result of the long delay in providing replies to these questions I rule that the Minister will provide substantive answers to overdue questions by midday on Thursday 11 August. Since the Opposition have been denied an opportunity to use written questions to scrutinise the Government in a timely manner they will receive an additional 10 supplementary oral questions to be used by the end of this week. I do accept that there will be occasional circumstances where replies are a day or two late and I do not expect to receive complaints from members in those circumstances. I also take this opportunity to remind all Ministers of their obligations but also of their ability to lodge an interim reply on the rare occasions that a substantive reply cannot be provided within six working days. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Point of order. Just one question—I wondered how you intended to divide those 10 questions amongst Opposition parties?SPEAKER: No I've related them entirely to the member whose questions have not been answered and who raised the question with me. It was my intention if Dr Reti had had a question to actually allocate the additional supplementaries to him but he doesn't have a question today so I thought it fair that his colleagues could share them.
SpeechVISITORSLatvia—Foreign MinisterSPEAKER: I'm sure that members would wish to welcome His Excellency Edgars Rinkēvičs Foreign Minister of the Republic of Latvia and his delegation who are present in the gallery.
Rurawhe AdrianWEDNESDAY 10 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.]
Tuesday 9 August 2022 - Volume 761
Oversight of Oranga Tamariki System and Children and Young People's Commission Bill — In Committee—Part 1
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 65New Zealand Labour 65.Noes 55New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Motion agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that the Minister's amendments to Supplementary Order Paper 209 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 217 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments to the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 75New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments to the amendments agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that the Minister's amendments to Part 1 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 209 as amended be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments as amended be agreed to.Ayes 85New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 33New Zealand National 33. Amendments as amended agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that Jan Logie's amendments to Part 1 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 43New Zealand National 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10. Noes 75New Zealand Labour 65; ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments not agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that Harete Hipango's amendment to clause 4 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 220 be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 53New Zealand National 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; ACT New Zealand 10.Noes 65New Zealand Labour 65. Amendment not agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That this House approve the following orders made under the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020:COVID-19 Public Health Response (Air Border) Amendment Order (No 5) 2022 (SL 2022/194)COVID-19 Public Health Response (Self-isolation Requirements and Permitted Work) Amendment Order (No 4) 2022 (SL 2022/195)COVID-19 Public Health Response (Self-isolation Requirements and Permitted Work) Amendment Order (No 5) 2022 (SL 2022/196)COVID-19 Public Health Response (Vaccinations) Amendment Order (No 5) 2022 (SL 2022/207)COVID-19 Public Health Response (Maritime Border and Other Matters) Amendment Order (No 2) 2022 (SL 2022/213).Ayes 98New Zealand Labour 65; New Zealand National 33.Noes 22Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Motion agreed to.Orders approved.
COVID-19 Orders — Approval
Firearms Prohibition Orders Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 2
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that the Minister's amendment to Part 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 212 be agreed to. Amendment agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The question is that the Hon Mark Mitchell's amendment inserting new clause 18A set out on Supplementary Order Paper 213 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 33New Zealand National 33.Noes 85New Zealand Labour 65; ACT New Zealand 10; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Amendment not agreed to.
Three Strikes Legislation Repeal Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Three Strikes Legislation Repeal Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10. Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.
12. Question No. 12—PoliceCHRIS BAILLIE (ACT) to the Minister of PoliceQuestion No. 12—Police12. CHRIS BAILLIE (ACT) to the Minister of Police: Does he stand by all his actions and policies relating to youth crime?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Police): Yes.Chris Baillie: Is the Government's Small Retailer Crime Prevention Fund still being trialled with a small group of businesses; if so when will a wider group of businesses be able to access this funding?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: There is funding available now. Only a small number of businesses have access to the fund so far. I think five have had improvements completed as a result of being able to access the fund so far. This of course is not the only thing that we're doing in that area though—for example a thousand fog cannons have been installed. I think of that thousand 999 have been installed; one apparently there are some installation issues with but the rest of that programme has more or less been completed. It is important to note however that these are if you like response measures because the ultimate goal has to be to reduce that level of offending in the first place.Chris Baillie: What proportion of youth ram raiders are being identified and having enforcement action taken against them?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The investigations are ongoing. I can't give the member the numbers as a proportion but I can certainly give him some overall numbers. In terms of just ram raids so looking exclusively at ram raids 38 offenders have been identified or arrested and I can tell him that almost all of them are under the age of 18. The median age is 15. A further 27 offenders have been identified using CCTV and police are currently working to figure out who they are. If we look at the overall National Retail Investigation Support Unit which of course will include a little bit more than just the ram raids there have been 43 offenders charged with 307 offences.Chris Baillie: Is there a specific offence code for ram raids; if not will he commit to creating one so that the Government's progress on this issue can be measured over time?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The police have been able to give me good numbers on ram raids. How they code offences for their purposes is a matter for the police—it's an operational matter. But they have been able to produce numbers around ram raids and the number of offenders who have been identified and charged.Chris Baillie: Does he agree with Police Association President Chris Cahill who said it feels like additional Police numbers have just been soaked up" and does he think this comment has anything to do with the 400 percent increase in ram raids over the last five years?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I think that the increase in ram raids is concerning. It is of course the police's job to follow up on those things as they are and there are consequences for those people who are engaged in that activity.SPEAKER: Sorry. Normally we get a bit of a sign because the member puts his mask back on. I was just waiting for—that concludes oral questions."
10. Question No. 10—Economic and Regional DevelopmentNAISI CHEN (Labour) to the Minister for Economic and Regional DevelopmentQuestion No. 10—Economic and Regional Development10. NAISI CHEN (Labour) to the Minister for Economic and Regional Development: What recent announcements has he made on opportunities for the space sector?Hon STUART NASH (Minister for Economic and Regional Development): Today United States Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman and I signed a framework agreement on how New Zealand and the United States will work together on the use of aerospace and outer space for peaceful purposes. The signing followed Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Vice President Kamala Harris welcoming the completion of negotiations on this agreement during their recent meeting in Washington DC. We have an incredibly innovative space sector here in New Zealand. Despite our small size we've become a notable player on the global space industry and signing the framework agreement marks an exciting step for our space sector. The partnership and deeper cooperation with NASA that will be facilitated by this agreement will over time contribute to wider economic social cultural and environmental benefits to Aotearoa New Zealand.Naisi Chen: What areas of collaboration might this agreement lead to?Hon STUART NASH: We are currently discussing areas of mutual interest with NASA. However as well as potential involvement in space exploration activities we see potential to jointly work on technologies applicable to on-earth challenges in key New Zealand interest areas and industries. These could include rapid pharmaceutical and vaccine development and production sustainable food production material sciences climate change - and disaster-resilient utilities and infrastructure and renewable energy generation.Naisi Chen: How many jobs does the space sector support?Hon STUART NASH: In 2019 Deloitte Access Economics estimated that the New Zealand space sector generated revenue of $1.75 billion of which $495 million represented returns to labour. The report found that the sector supported 5000 fulltime-equivalent (FTE) roles across all space subsectors. The space sector also indirectly supported approximately 7000 FTE positions in industries that provide services to the space sector. The space industry is knowledge intensive and dominated by high-skill jobs. Globally the space sector has among the highest levels of returns to labour of any sector and today's signing is a further positive development for high-wage jobs in New Zealand.
8. Question No. 8—Social Development and EmploymentJO LUXTON (Labour—Rangitata) to the Minister for Social Development and EmploymentQuestion No. 8—Social Development and Employment8. JO LUXTON (Labour—Rangitata) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What updates has she received on the progress of Mana in Mahi?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development and Employment): I'm pleased to report that the Government's Mana in Mahi programme continues to go from strength to strength with over 5000 job seekers supported into jobs. This exceeds our initial target of 4000 following its extension in 2019. Nearly half or 44 percent are Māori or Pacific and 64 percent are aged under 24 years; 89 percent who have a training pathway are working towards a qualification at NZQA level 3 or higher; and 90 percent have either completed are currently active or have exited early but are not back on benefit.Jo Luxton: How does this compare to the Government's other employment programmes?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: We remain relentless deliberate and unapologetic in our approach to supporting Kiwis into jobs as we secure our recovery from COVID-19. What we are seeing alongside record exits off benefit and into work and in addition to over 5000 people in Mana in Mahi placements is almost 50000 apprentices picking up a trade through Apprenticeship Boost almost 18000 people through Flexi-wage and 3800 young people engaged in He Poutama Rangatahi. Mana in Mahi is only one tool amongst many in our tool box that we're using to support young people into employment education or training.Jo Luxton: What feedback has she seen on Mana in Mahi?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Rod Giles CE of Contracting Warehouse who has had a relationship with the Ministry of Social Development for over 40 years said During this time and under various Governments I have experienced many variations of incentives for both employers and the unemployed. In my experience the Mana in Mahi scheme is currently the most successful to date both for myself as an employer and I believe for the candidates that I have employed.""
6. Question No. 6—EducationDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 6—Education6. DAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What contribution is the Government making to getting New Zealanders work-ready and helping to meet industries' skill needs?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Revitalising apprenticeships and vocational education has been a top priority for this Government. We're now seeing record numbers of apprentices learning their trade whilst working on the job. As of April this year there were 62000 apprentices across a range of industries. That's a 60 percent increase in the last two years alone. A further 41000 industry trainees were enrolled in shorter programmes of study. This shows that the vocational education system is in good heart supported by the Government's Apprenticeship Boost and Targeted Training and Apprenticeship Fund.Dan Rosewarne: What specific initiatives has the Government funded to increase the effectiveness and diversity of workplace training?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In order for workplace learning to meet New Zealand's needs we need to know what training is needed in the first place and we need to reach the full breadth of the population. That's why we funded the Building and Construction Industry Training Organisation to develop a forecasting tool that displays national and regional skills gaps and surpluses within the construction and infrastructure labour market. That approach is now being rolled out across a wider range of industries. Project Retrain has also been funded to attract more women into the construction sector and again similar approaches are now being rolled out in other traditionally male-dominated industries.Dan Rosewarne: What other programmes are getting New Zealanders work-ready and helping to meet industries' skills needs?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: There's heaps. So I'll just give a partial list: 3000 Kiwis have benefited from intensive literacy and numeracy over the last year; 4400 from workplace literacy programmes; 13000 school students earned credits in the workplace through Gateway; and there are around 10000 studying at trades academies. As a response to COVID-19 we funded a direct career service which has delivered nearly 10000 sessions of face-to-face careers advice and another 2000 over the phone. Nearly a quarter of those sessions were for under-25-year-olds.
5. Question No. 5—RevenueNICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National) to the Minister of RevenueQuestion No. 5—Revenue5. NICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National) to the Minister of Revenue: Does he agree with the Minister of Finance's statement from 17 July 2022 regarding the cost of living payment that this payment will support an estimated 2.1 million people" and is he satisfied with the delivery of this payment?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Revenue): Yes and yes. This payment has already reached over 1.3 million New Zealanders promptly supporting them through a time of elevated cost of living. An estimated 800000 additional people will become entitled as they file their tax return for the year ended 31 March 2022 or provide their bank details.Nicola Willis: Does he stand by his statement made to Tova O'Brien in an interview last week where he said that for an ineligible person to have received the payment they "would have to be acting fraudulently"?Hon DAVID PARKER: No I don't think I did say that. Erica Stanford: Yes you did.Hon DAVID PARKER: If I said that that's been taken out of context. I always made it clear that the payment was being made on the basis of the details held by Inland Revenue.Nicola Willis: Does the Minister stand by the statement he made to Tova O'Brien that "The French man as your example … He will know or should know from the information that he has received that because he is no longer resident in New Zealand he's not qualified. Therefore for him to get the payment he would have to be acting fraudulently."?Hon DAVID PARKER: Yes I do because I heard the radio station play a clip in respect of that person which indicated that the person knew that the entitlement was based on being resident in New Zealand and he knew that he wasn't.Nicola Willis: Did IRD conduct data matching with Immigration New Zealand or other agencies to check whether potential recipients had moved overseas and if not why not?Hon DAVID PARKER: No they haven't in part because their information-sharing arrangements with Customs don't cover the use of the data in that way.Nicola Willis: Did it not occur to the Minister that not everyone in IRD's database would have updated their address after having moved overseas and why were no steps taken to prevent them receiving the payment?Hon DAVID PARKER: Indeed Inland Revenue advised Cabinet and Cabinet agreed that this would be paid on the basis of eligibility criteria that would not always be correct. Inland Revenue advised and Cabinet agreed that the payment in those situations would be non-recoverable other than in the cases of fraudulent activity. Nicola Willis: Can the Minister guarantee that no money has been paid to prisoners through the cost of living payment who are just as ineligible for that payment as those living overseas?Hon DAVID PARKER: I can guarantee that they're ineligible to receive the payment and I can also advise the member that I've received no reports of any such instance."