edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Bridges Simon; Hipkins ChrisTHURSDAY 6 APRIL 2017Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon SIMON BRIDGES (Acting Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 11 April the Government will look to complete the Committee stages of the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Bill and the Māori Purposes Bill and make progress on a number of other bills on the Order Paper. Wednesday 12 April will be a members' day.CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka): I wonder whether the Acting Leader of the House can inform us why the motions appointing the Rt Hon Winston Peters to the Intelligence and Security Committee and appointing a new Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment which were scheduled to be done this afternoon have been removed from the Order Paper for today.Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Acting Leader of the House): Can I assure the Opposition Leader of the House that those are matters that we will certainly get to as a priority but we are a very busy Government.
Wednesday 7 June 2017 - Volume 723
International Transparent Treaties Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the International Transparent Treaties Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Electoral (Registration by Special Vote) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 59New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Noes 60New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
Electoral (Registration by Special Vote) Amendment Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Crown Minerals (Protection of World Heritage Sites) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 45New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14.Noes 74New Zealand National 58; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
11. Budget 2017—FisheriesIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Minister for Primary IndustriesBudget 2017—Fisheries11. IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Minister for Primary Industries: How is the Government supporting the transparency and management of our fisheries through Budget 2017?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries): A Budget boost of $30.5 million of operating funding over the next 4 years will help to upgrade and modernise our fisheries management system. The funding will help introduce the Integrated Electronic Monitoring and Reporting System commonly called IEMRS which will give us the most transparent and accountable commercial fishery anywhere in the world. The funding will also support more detailed scientific research to improve our knowledge of the marine environment enabling management of fish stocks as well as the ecosystems that support them.Ian McKelvie: How will this technology help support the compliance of the commercial fishing activities?Hon NATHAN GUY: Vessel position monitoring and electronic catch reporting will begin on 1 October this year. This will be followed by cameras on every vessel phased in from 1 October next year. This means that every fishing vessel can be monitored at all times no matter where they are and any illegal activity can be dealt with. Through the future of our fisheries programme the Government is also refreshing the rules around landing and discarding of fish to ensure that our policies complement this new technology.Ian McKelvie: How will this investment create more information about the health of our fish stocks?Hon NATHAN GUY: Good question. The IEMRS system will also allow for finer-scale management of our fish stocks by giving the Ministry for Primary Industries more information to focus on smaller geographic areas such as specific bays. The new investment will also support more detailed scientific research to improve our knowledge of the marine environment enabling management of fish stocks as well as the ecosystems that support them. New approaches will also develop new information about the state of our fisheries using biological indicators of stock status.
9. Budget 2017—Learning Support and Ongoing Resourcing Scheme FundingDr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister of EducationBudget 2017—Learning Support and Ongoing Resourcing Scheme Funding9. Dr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister of Education: What extra help for children with additional learning needs was provided in Budget 2017?Hon NIKKI KAYE (Minister of Education): Budget 2017 provided an additional $63.3 million over the next 4 years to support students with additional learning needs. This included $15 million to extend teacher aide support to an extra 625 students per year. This investment fulfils the Government's commitment to roll out in-class support for 4000 students. I am also pleased to advise the House that this funding also included $4.2 million in funding for further support for parents and teachers of children with autism.Dr Jian Yang: How does this commitment build on the Government's existing funding for learning support?Hon NIKKI KAYE: The Government has significantly increased funding for children with additional learning needs by around 33 percent since 2009 to $630 million per year. In addition to what I have already outlined $34.7 million of new funding will provide specialist behaviour services for an extra 1000 children and $6 million will also be invested to support young children with difficulties talking and listening. This Government is committed to providing support at the earliest opportunity to give children the best start to their education and the best chance in life.Chris Hipkins: Why was the additional funding for the ongoing resourcing scheme (ORS) allocated in this year's Budget less than the Ministry of Education advised her was necessary to meet cost pressures?Hon NIKKI KAYE: I would have to go and have a look at the statement that he has made. But what I can tell the member is that in 2016 there was a significant additional investment in ORS. That is on top of the money that we have put in in terms of behavioural services on top of the money in terms of communication services and on top of the money in terms of early intervention.
6. Budget 2017—Vote HealthSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to the Minister of HealthBudget 2017—Vote Health6. SIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to the Minister of Health: What will the $888 million invested into Vote Health in Budget 2017 the biggest increase in 11 years deliver for New Zealanders?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Health remains the Government's No. 1 funding priority in Budget 2017 and this increase in spending will allow us to continue to deliver better health services for a growing population. As in previous years the largest chunk of this funding is allocated to the district health boards with $439 million going to investment in services and improved access for New Zealanders. In total district health boards will benefit from an extra $1.76 billion over 4 years. Simon O'Connor: What other new initiatives are funded in Budget 2017? Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Budget 2017 also includes extra funding for a range of new initiatives including $1.54 billion for wage increases for 55000 care and disability support workers as part of the pay equity settlement. There is also $205 million for disability support services which includes $27 million going to the Enabling Good Lives programme. The sum of $100 million dollars through the Budget's social investment package has been set aside for innovative new mental health services and $38.5 million is allocated to continue the roll-out of the bowel screening programme. Of course none of this would have been possible without the steady management of the economy which has allowed us to maintain sustainable investment into health services.
Clendon DavidSITTINGS OF THE HOUSEDAVID CLENDON (Musterer—Green): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): A point of order David Clendon.DAVID CLENDON: Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker—yes with a C" thank you. The House has made good progress this evening. We have come to a natural break in proceedings. I would like to seek the leave of the House for the House to rise for the day at this point.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Is there any objection to that? No member is foolish enough and seeing as we have the rare occasion of the Assistant Speaker celebrating a blue win over reds and the proud son of Wainuiōmata Tana Umaga coaching the team to the first victory of this series over the Lions we will adjourn until 2 o'clock tomorrow.The House adjourned at 9.45 p.m."
Hayes JoJOANNE HAYES (National): I just want to thank everybody for their contributions here tonight supporting the first reading of this bill. I look forward to it getting through the vote and heading off to the Justice and Electoral Committee where we will listen to more testimony and information that will come. Without any further ado I commend the bill to the House.Bill read a first time. Bill referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee.
Marriage (Court Consent to Marriage of Minors) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Foster-Bell PaulPAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): I take great pleasure in rising to support my friend and colleague MP Jo Hayes' excellent member's bill which seeks to require Family Court approval for the marriage of 16-year-old children and 17-year-old children—minors I think it is—in New Zealand. I think it is a necessary measure and I have to commend the member for bringing this bill to the House. It is something she has worked assiduously on now for a number of years.I also want to welcome the cross-party agreement that has broken out over this I think useful and necessary piece of legislation. As the Pacific-regional representative for the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association I want to commend our female counterpart group the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians who have worked so successfully across party lines to engage with the community and draft a set of measures that sadly are necessary given the prevalence of forced cultural marriage without the child's consent.In a previous life I worked overseas and had some dealings with an immigration case where the applicant later turned out to be a people trafficker a drug dealer and someone who offended against New Zealand citizens here in New Zealand. It should have been picked up immediately that this person was not a fit person and was not of good character to come to this country when it was recorded on his initial immigration application many years ago that he had married a girl who was then age 9 in a country where it was legal to do so. It may remain legal in a few dark and desperate parts of the world to marry a child as young as the age of 9 but this is an alien concept in New Zealand and something that we cannot accept under whatever guise it is presented whether it be as a cultural norm or something that is legally permitted. Let us not focus just on certain parts of the world that get a lot of media attention such as the Middle East and Africa. I would note that there are at least two US states where it is legal for girls—girls specifically—as young as 12 and 13 to marry. In the same state there are special provisions if the girl is pregnant where very little approval or oversight is needed for that marriage whereas in those same states the age for boys is 14. So there is a disjunct there. I think this is legislation that will be particularly protective of girls because we know that of the thousand or so teenagers—that is people 19 years old and younger—who marry in New Zealand there is a predomination of female victims of this practice. So I welcome the bill I commend my colleague and I hope it passes forthwith.
Graham KennedyDr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green): The Green Party will certainly be supporting this bill and we do so for reasons that are clearly beyond the comprehension and ability of National MP colleagues to even begin to comprehend. There is probably one person sitting across the aisle there who has an understanding of and insight into constitutional and international law and the role of Parliament in a constitutional democracy—one.The current chair of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee was so moved with personal emotion to launch a personal attack against our colleague Mr Fletcher Tabuteau who is also a member of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee conveying misplaced scorn bordering on anger against a colleague. I will quote Mr Muller: so naive" of Mr Tabuteau "a disgrace that we should be having to have a conversation" "does a disservice to this Parliament." The chairman in being unable to control his emotions and his anger did a disservice to this Parliament. He should be ashamed. He let our committee down. As it happened he was not actually a member of the committee as I recall at the time. The previous chairman Mark Mitchell conveyed dignity and courtesy to all members of the committee at the time and to all submitters about 3000 of them every one of them impassioned—3000 written submissions and 255 oral submissions presented in person. The previous chairman of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee conveyed the utmost courtesy to every single one of them. He did the committee proud.The philosophy that is animating the current chair is an over-interpretation of "New Zealand Inc." It conveys a philosophical skew on the one hand and a certain constitutional ignorance on the other. The fact is that the treaty examination by Parliament is simply an undertaking where with a majority on the committee it receives submissions and reports back to the House on the treaty with no obligation for the House to actually even debate it. In this particular case the House did not debate it. There was no vote taken. That is the extent of the treaty examination. The ratification process proceeds independently of Parliament. It is not dependent on Parliament. The implementing legislation is the only role that the Parliament has beyond that supine treaty examination. The select committee relies on the very Government department to report back with a national interest analysis made on the basis of its own original judgment about the merits of commencing and proceeding with negotiations. Whereas six of the 12 Trans-Pacific Partnership countries require a parliamentary majority for ratification in New Zealand the Government can proceed with supreme indifference to Parliament. There is a strong reason to have a requirement that the Government in the form of the Minister report to the Parliament before any signature of any international negotiation or any international treaty is finalised. We will be supporting the bill."
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): I stand to speak to the Electoral (Registration by Special Vote) Amendment Bill tonight in its first reading. I am a member of the Justice and Electoral Committee which I joined in 2016 and every 3 years this committee undertakes a review of the general election. It is a public process it is advised by the Electoral Commission and it is open to submissions from the general public. The last review was initiated on 30 October 2014 1 month following the last general election and the submissions to that process closed in March 2015. The feedback from the hearings was worked on for over a year by that select committee and the findings were reported to this House last year in April. There were quite a few recommendations that came out of that process.One of the issues highlighted in the review was that the availability of the roll is important to ensure its integrity and we heard that late enrolment would in fact prevent effective scrutiny of that roll. It could affect how we even deal with fraudulent voting. We do not like to think that that is a possibility but we need to protect the roll in that case. In the open democracy that we live in here in New Zealand we cannot afford to do anything that would compromise the integrity of the voting system that we have in place. It works well and the review is conducted after every general election. That ensures that the details that are thoroughly investigated as an outcome of that review and the learnings from the previous election are fed through considered and acted upon where appropriate.The advance voting system is relatively new to this country. I would just like to read a section from the report that I think is valuable to this debate: The commission advised us that because of the numbers potentially involved it would not be confident it could validate election day special vote enrolment applications with integrity without delaying the official count. The commission instead recommended that the question of whether election day special vote enrolment applications could be included in the official count should be reconsidered for the 2020 election in light of lessons learnt in 2017." It is clear that we are going to be looking at the results of the 2017 election and that will feed through to a further review on advance voting and enrolment. Thank you.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m."
Friendly Societies and Credit Unions (Regulatory Improvements) Amendment Bill — First Reading
Genter Julie AnneJULIE ANNE GENTER (Green): The Green Party is supporting this bill. I am a huge fan of credit unions. My grandfather was a member of a credit union. I have been a member of a credit union. They demonstrate just what can be achieved by a financial institution that is member-owned and democratically controlled and frankly I think we need a lot more of that. Many people do not even realise that credit unions are an option for them and this legislation will go some way to allowing credit unions to properly reach out to their potential members and let them know what financial services they can provide.I congratulate the member Stuart Smith on bringing this bill before the House. It is wonderful that it was pulled from the ballot but it is actually quite a travesty that it had to be brought in on a members' day and not as part of the Government programme. I spoke to the credit unions and Co-op Money NZ some years ago and they were asking for these changes. They were concerned because they were talking with officials at the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment who had been looking at potential changes but had backed away from them.I am glad that the member Stuart Smith did bring this before the House but it should have been a priority for his Government. There is no reason why this should have to happen on a members' day. It should have been a priority for the Government. I do not want to take up any more time on a members' day so I will sit down.
Tabuteau FletcherFLETCHER TABUTEAU (NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would ask you to please reflect on the ruling you gave to Mr William Sio and reflect on a ruling you made earlier to a New Zealand First member who introduced a bill in this House some weeks ago. You courteously allowed him to finish his contribution and I acknowledge you for that but—and I appreciate it is a matter of degree—in no way did he read his speech to anywhere near the same extent as that member Stuart Smith has done in this House this afternoon. I ask you simply to reflect on that.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Well—[Interruption] No I am not going to take any further comment. If the member looks very carefully at the Speakers' rulings he will see that this matter is a matter entirely for the Speaker. I will give the member an explanation to say that my opinion and the reason for my judgment was—given the members have I think about equal experience—that this matter is a more technical matter and there were some things that it was important to get on the record of the House. That is why I exercised my judgment that way. I think that if the member feels that his party has been picked on in this matter he should talk to my colleagues.
Korako NukCROWN MINERALS (PROTECTION OF WORLD HERITAGE SITES) AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 10 May.NUK KORAKO (National): This bill is poorly thought out it is poorly worded and one thing about this bill is that Ruth Dyson did not ever go and consult with people like mana whenua Ngāi Tahu iwi. She never went to the local council. We have got the mayor sitting here from the Westland District Council and they are so worried because this bill has caused so much angst because of the fact that there are so many people who could lose from this bill if it was to go through.Also there is no thought as to what is already in place particularly through conservation legislation and particularly through Treaty settlement legislation as well. We have to look at the mana whenua iwi situation here. If this bill went through well then mana whenua could be denied access into those taonga areas—and I am talking about te wāhi tapu.So when we look at this we actually have a plan when you look at the way that this heritage site is actually managed. Mana whenua iwi have a management plan in conjunction with the Department of Conservation. We also have to look at the Ngai Tahu (Pounamu Vesting) Act because that will also bring in disrepute about this particular bill. This bill is a travesty and should not go through. Kia ora tātou.
Motions — Officers of Parliament Committee—Disclosure of Secret Evidence
Mallard TrevorMOTIONSOfficers of Parliament Committee—Disclosure of Secret EvidenceHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I move That pursuant to Standing Order 219(3) the House authorise the disclosure of all secret evidence received by the Officers of Parliament Committee in its Inquiry into the Appointment of a Controller and Auditor-General to Sir Maarten Wevers for the purpose of his provision of specialist advice to the committee. By way of brief explanation this is to avoid contempt of the House—something that would be quite easy to do in these circumstances—by Sir Maarten or witnesses to the committee and to make sure that Sir Maarten's report does not contain the level of ignorance that we have heard on this issue from some people.Motion agreed to.
Points of Order — Centennial of Battle of Messines—Leave to Move Motion Without Notice
Mark Ron; Carter DavidBattle of Messines Centennial—Leave to Move Motion Without NoticeRON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate to mark the centennial of the Battle of Messines fought 100 years ago today.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Points of Order — Select Committees—Participation of Executive Members
Mallard Trevor; Carter DavidHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can I also ask you to refer that decision to the Standing Orders Committee which without going into any detail of the consideration is looking at related matters.Mr SPEAKER: I will do so.
Hipkins Chris; Bridges Simon; Seymour DavidWEDNESDAY 7 JUNE 2017Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.POINTS OF ORDERSelect Committees—Membership Members of the ExecutiveCHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would like to ask you to give a considered ruling on the issue of members of the executive subbing on to parliamentary select committees when the select committee is considering a matter that that member of the executive has administrative responsibility for or some delegated responsibility for particularly when it comes to financial reviews and Estimates hearings. The purpose of those is for the non-executive members to hold the Government of the day to account and to scrutinise the actions of the Government. Whilst I accept that there are occasions when junior Ministers will sub on to a select committee to make up the numbers on the Government side the idea that they would be substituted in on a debate on a topic that they have executive responsibility for does seem to me to undermine the basic principle that it is the non-executive members of Parliament's job to scrutinise and hold to account members of the executive for their actions. Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the House): Mr Speaker I am sure you will give the member's point thorough consideration. I would just simply make the very simple point that the junior members of the executive outside Cabinet are none the less members of Parliament and actually given their status they may well be able to make—[Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a point of order. Hon SIMON BRIDGES: They may be able to help inform the debates in those select committees. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I just remind members to my left that this is a point of order. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I may be able to assist in two regards Mr Speaker. One is that the member is clearly referring to my appearance this morning on the Education and Science Committee so I make the point that really what he is talking about is parliamentary under-secretaries. The Business Committee and you have considered where the delineations lie between parliamentary under-secretaries as members of Parliament and the executive so I think your consideration if I could suggest it should consider it particularly in respect of parliamentary under-secretaries. Also I draw to your attention that Mita Ririnui was a Minister and a select committee member permanently for a long period of time under the previous Government. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I thank all members for their contribution. It is an important matter that I will certainly have a look at and I will come back to the House with a considered ruling.
Tuesday 4 July 2017 - Volume 723
Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill — In Committee
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 279 in the name of the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell to Part 5 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the following amendments in the name of Meka Whaitiri to clauses 154 and 184 be agreed to:in clause 154(1)(b) after how governance agreements are" insert "reviewed and".in clause 184(4)(a) replace "5" with "10".A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Meka Whaitiri to clause 193 be agreed to:in clause 193 delete subclause (4)A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 322 in the name of Peeni Henare to clause 197 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 5 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 62New Zealand National 58; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 57New Zealand Labour 31; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Part 5 as amended agreed to."
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a first time.Ayes 105New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 31; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.
Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading
Enhancing Identity Verification and Border Processes Legislation Bill — Second Reading
VoteAmendments recommended by the Law and Order Committee by majority agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the Enhancing Identity Verification and Border Processes Legislation Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 103New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 31; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 16Green Party 14; Māori Party 2.Bill read a second time.
10. Christ Church Cathedral—Crown Funding Offer and Other AssistanceNUK KORAKO (National) to the Minister supporting Greater Christchurch RegenerationChrist Church Cathedral—Crown Funding Offer and Other Assistance10. NUK KORAKO (National) to the Minister supporting Greater Christchurch Regeneration: What announcements has she made regarding the Christchurch Cathedral?Hon NICKY WAGNER (Minister supporting Greater Christchurch Regeneration): Today I announced a revised Crown offer to support the reinstatement of the Christ Church Cathedral. It is supported by a cross-party commitment to legislate streamline and fast track the process. The revised offer confirms funding from numerous supporters and sources. The largest amount is from the Church itself from insurance proceeds a Government grant for $10 million and a suspensory loan for $15 million which will be forgiven if the synod reinstates. There is $10 million from the Christchurch City Council and generous donations from individuals organised by the Greater Christchurch Buildings Trust. In all the offer represents about $90 million which is enough to complete the reinstatement of the Cathedral and its auxiliary buildings although fundraising will still be required for the tower and steeple and ongoing endowment.Nuk Korako: What other assistance has been provided in addition to funding?Hon NICKY WAGNER: If reinstatement is confirmed an independent fundraising trust similar to one at the arts centre in Christchurch will be established to secure any remaining funding required as well as a joint venture between the Church property trustees and the fundraising trust to govern and manage the project. Most party leaders in this House have agreed to support legislation in principle that will fast track the reinstatement of the Cathedral. I wish to thank my parliamentary colleagues for their support.Nuk Korako: How does the revised proposal help Christchurch?Hon NICKY WAGNER: Christ Church Cathedral sits at the very heart of Christchurch. As well as being a place of worship it is a significant and recognised category 1 heritage building. It is also the city's namesake the symbol of the city a community facility and a tourist attraction. If the synod agrees to this offer when it votes in September it will break the current stalemate on what should be done with the Cathedral and provide a clear path forward towards the regeneration of the city of Christchurch.
8. Education—Digital Fluency CurriculumDr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister of EducationEducation—Digital Fluency Curriculum8. Dr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made on digital fluency in schools?Hon NIKKI KAYE (Minister of Education): Last week I was pleased to announce that consultation has opened on the new digital technologies content for The New Zealand Curriculum and Te Marautanga o Aotearoa the Māori-medium curriculum. We are breaking new ground with a curriculum that offers unique Māori content learning that can be shaped according to students' individual needs and futureproofing so it can adapt to new technology as it arises. The new curriculum content is about ensuring that students across year levels have access to rich learning aimed at building their digital skills and fluency to prepare them for the future. Our curriculum needs to keep pace with this fast-changing world. The new curriculum content sets out what students need to learn to become not just digital-fluent users but also skilled creators of digital innovations and inventions.Dr Jian Yang: How will the Government invest to support young people to be digitally fluent?Hon NIKKI KAYE: We are investing approximately $40 million over 3 years to support implementation of the new curriculum and ensure that our system is set up to enhance the digital fluency of young people. The package includes $24 million of new funding and $16 million of existing funding and comes on top of the Government's $700 million investment to enhance school connectivity and $21 million over 3 years already prioritised to teach digital technologies. This package includes exciting initiatives such as digital enterprise scholarships a national digital championship and more interactive resources to support students' learning.Dr Jian Yang: What feedback has she seen from education and tech leaders on the announcement?Hon NIKKI KAYE: I have seen a wide range of support for this initiative including from the education sector the ICT industry and businesses. This includes feedback from IT Professionals New Zealand which said This isn't just about changes to a Curriculum but about positioning New Zealand at the forefront of today's digital world and equipping students with the skills they need to not just survive but truly thrive as they navigate through it."; and from New Zealand Educational Institute president Lynda Stuart who welcomed the announcement and said "it was also positive to see that digital fluency would receive a greater emphasis in initial teacher training to ensure new teachers were ready to deliver the new curriculum content.""
5. State and Social Housing—Hutt Valley DevelopmentCHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister for Social HousingState and Social Housing—Hutt Valley Development5. CHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister for Social Housing: What recent announcements has she made regarding social housing in the Hutt Valley?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister for Social Housing): Today I announced an extensive work programme to build and refurbish more than 700 homes in the Hutt Valley over the next 5 years with the first new homes to be completed by mid - next year. The programme includes 30 new social houses that are commencing immediately on four sites in Lower Hutt; master-planning for around 300 further new homes across four sites in Ēpuni Naenae and Waiwhetū; and refurbishing 383 existing homes to make them warm and dry and to bring them up to standard. This is on top of the work already completed by this Government in the Hutt Valley with the transformative 109-house urban regeneration development at Pōmare which was completed last year and 179 homes that we have seen earthquake-strengthened and modernised over the past 4 years.Chris Bishop: How will the refurbishment programme help the local housing stock in the Hutt Valley?Hon AMY ADAMS: The Hutt Valley housing stock is amongst the oldest in Housing New Zealand's portfolio. That is why as part of today's announcement $67.3 million has been committed to retrofit 383 homes throughout the Hutt Valley. The refurbishment plans include improvements and upgrades to kitchen and bathroom facilities carpets curtains and heating sources throughout these homes. All of these improvements are critical to ensuring that Hutt Valley social housing tenants live in warm dry and fit-for-purpose homes.David Seymour: Minister how much of this housing is suitable for students because my campaign manager brought over some Americans and it has just got a bit out of hand?Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. That question is completely out of order.Phil Twyford: How many of the new and additional homes announced for the Hutt Valley will be affordable?Hon AMY ADAMS: Well of the 330 new homes 130 will be social homes which I know Labour is not interested in and at least 60 will be affordable homes.
1. Economy—Reports Confidence and OutlookJOANNE HAYES (National) to the Minister of FinanceORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSEconomy—Reports Confidence and Outlook1. JOANNE HAYES (National) to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the level of confidence in the New Zealand economy?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Finance): The New Zealand Institute of Economic Research today released its quarterly survey of business opinion. It shows business confidence is high with a net 23 percent positive about New Zealand's economic outlook. This level of confidence points to GDP growth of between 3 and 4 percent. All key activity indicators remain above their long-term averages. The survey highlights increased investment in plant and machinery and indicates employers are willing to invest in the equipment they need to boost productivity increase production and expand into new markets.Joanne Hayes: What other indicators has he seen of positive momentum in our economy?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The ANZ bank released its Business Outlook figures last Thursday showing that 25 percent of businesses are optimistic about the year ahead. That is up 10 points on the previous month. When it comes to their own business a net 43 percent of businesses expect better times ahead. That is up five points and is the highest level since July 2014. Westpac's Employment Confidence Index released on Friday shows people are increasingly upbeat about the state of the labour market. The index increased 3.5 to 113.4. That is the highest level recorded since before the global financial crisis in 2008. That means workers are increasingly confident about their job security and new job opportunities opening up.Joanne Hayes: What is underpinning the strengthening confidence of employees and businesses?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: This Government's strong economic plan is delivering concrete results whether it is the 137000 new jobs added in the last 12 months or average after-tax wages rising faster than inflation. In addition businesses can see the benefits of this Government's large investment in infrastructure to boost productivity and help get goods to market. The opening of the $1.4 billion Waterview tunnel is already proving beneficial for example for moving between South and west Auckland or making a trip to the airport.Joanne Hayes: What examples has he seen recently of employers and of exporters using the current favourable economic conditions to expand and get ahead?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Over the last few weeks I have had the honour of attending many export awards ceremonies around the country showcasing innovative companies increasing their productivity and growing new markets. At the Bay of Plenty awards Dominion Salt showed how a company founded in 1942 can reinvent itself and generate high export growth on the back of targeting premium products for the pharmaceutical industry. And at the Auckland-Waikato awards ABE'S Real Bagels won its category with successful expansion into Australia. It is now shipping five container-loads of bagels to Australia every week.
Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (Junior Whip—National): I move That the question be now put.Motion agreed to.
Paraone PitaPITA PARAONE (NZ First): Tēnā koe Mr Chairman. I am pleased to be able to take a call in this Committee stage of Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill and I want to concentrate on clause 156 Rights of owners of Māori freehold land managed under governance agreement". If I can recall correctly the last time this bill came before the House and was in the Committee stage the Minister took some time to remind me that Māori land has always been subject to registration with the Land Transfer Office. But what he omitted to tell the Committee is that while that may be so land that was owned by more than a certain number of owners was not registrable in the Land Transfer Office—if I can recall correctly. I only say so in that I remember the 1967 Māori land Act where the then Minister introduced a clause that allowed for Māori land that was surveyed with four owners or fewer to become what was termed "Europeanised". Part of that process was that they could be registered with the Land Transfer Office.One needs to ask the question: why was it limited to just four owners? It is quite easy to imagine the difficulty it would be to register all Māori land that was surveyed but had a large number of shareholders. I just want to say that it seems to me that this bill is aimed at overcoming that difficulty in terms of registration by recognising governance entities as being legal owners. So at the moment I have interests in Māori land of which I am a legal owner. But if I choose and my fellow owners choose to appoint a governance body to administer that land then I lose my legal ownership—it automatically transfers over to the governance body. I just wonder whether in fact many of our people out in the real world realise that they actually lose their legal ownership if they choose to appoint a governance body. That is how I read this particular clause. If I am wrong then the Minister will certainly correct me.Again it is all about it would seem to me making it much easier for certain groups to be able to what I would say manipulate—manipulate the ability to do what they want to do even if it is against the wishes of the majority. I hope the Minister may take a call to explain that particular aspect in terms of owners losing their legal right as owners to a governance body which then becomes the legal owner."
Tisch LindsayTE TURE WHENUA MĀORI BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed from 21 June.Part 5 Authority to act in relation to Māori freehold land (continued)The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): When we were last considering the bill we were debating Part 5. The Minister the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell has the call and has 34 seconds remaining if he wishes. I call Peeni Henare—tēnā koe.
Korako NukNUK KORAKO (National): Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā. Thank you for the opportunity to be able to take a short call on the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill (No 2). I think it is really refreshing to know that all but one party I believe is actually supporting this bill to the select committee and I think the important thing—just hearing the different speeches from both sides of the House—is that we all agree that first of all this bill is a very very practical bill. It is a common-sense bill and it probably reflects in a lot of ways that more New Zealanders are actually choosing to live in rental accommodation. One thing here is that with that is an industry where you have scrupulous landlords and even tenants actually who are involved in it. This Government is very much committed to providing better protections for both responsible tenants and also responsible landlords.Just hearing from the Green Party though it is a little difficult to accept the fact that it is not supporting this bill because I would think that a lot of its supporters are actually the type of people who would require a number of these protections that this bill is going to undertake. It was really interesting actually listening to the New Zealand First speaker Denis O'Rourke because he very much critiqued the fact that there are new things particularly the scourge of society that is the P epidemic and that there is necessary legislation that this bill gives to try to address a lot of those issues that come from the use of P particularly in accommodation.But I suppose one thing that I think is important is an excellent example of the real practicality of this legislation. If we go only a very very short distance from here to Molesworth Street there was a situation where an old office block was transformed illegally into residential apartments. This happened and then the problem came after the earthquakes here. What happened was that the existing law did not actually—the building was not at all covered by the Tenancy Tribunal to have jurisdiction to remedy complaints that we had evicted residents who were in a converted commercial building. When the tenants went to the residential tenancy association it could not help them. The reason for that was that the accommodation was illegal originally and there was no way that the tenants could be assisted. But if this legislation had been in place then that would not have been an issue. It would not have been a problem.So that actually highlights one of the great things that this Government is doing—the foresight particularly around other legislation that we have put in place. This shows a Government that has not given up at all. This Government is continually bringing excellent legislation to this House all the way up to the final term.Metiria Turei: About luggage? Excellent legislation about luggage!NUK KORAKO: So—oh that is OK. You used the word imagine" and I was just thinking when you used that "Imagine there was no Green Party." and that is easy very easy if you try. So kia ora to you. Nō reira e mihi atu ki a koutou katoa. Imagine!"
Hayes JoJOANNE HAYES (National): I rise to take a brief call on the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill (No 2) in its first reading. I want to congratulate the Minister for Building and Construction for bringing this bill. As the previous speaker Denis O'Rourke said we have waited a little while for this bill to get here. It is a narrow-focused bill and I say that it is about time that it came before this Parliament.I just want to say that some of the kōrero that came out from the Greens tonight over the harm to families from eviction from houses that are P contaminated—I just want to say that if it were my family I would like them out of that house and away from that house so that the various testing could carry on. I would like to remove them to keep them away from the harm that that house might impose.I like this bill because it is a strong piece of legislation. It does deal with the three main things that actually affect people who are renting and landlords who are renting their properties and it also empowers the tribunal as well so that it is able to do things that it is not able to do until this bill comes into law.As I said a lot of my colleagues and some of the people on the other side of the House have already given very good outlines of this bill. I have no hesitation in supporting it to select committee and I welcome it to select committee. Thank you.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): I too stand in support of the Land Transfer Bill tonight in its third and final reading. This bill is sponsored by the Minister for Land Information Hon Mark Mitchell. I commend the Government Administration Committee for the work that it has done over many years in the preparation of this bill that we are debating and as we have heard in other speeches tonight it is better late than never.The Land Transfer Act is in itself over 60 years old. Some of the language in it is of course very archaic difficult to understand and a bit confusing but it is also based on a paper-based system. So this new bill will bring the legislation into the 21st century and make it fit more easily with the modern reality of our electronically based systems.The current Act has to be read in conjunction with two other statutes too. That in itself is confusing for landowners who wish to make themselves familiar with their rights and their obligations. So again it is another really good reason for the updating of this legislation.This bill has been strongly supported by the legal profession. In fact the New Zealand Law Society and the Auckland District Law Society have had extensive input into the drafting of this bill. They have been fully consulted throughout its development. It is also supported by financial institutions and that was through the New Zealand Bankers' Association and the Financial Services Federation. Land Information New Zealand also consulted very widely with its key stakeholders. Also the Office of the Privacy Commissioner had a part to play in the development of provisions within the bill. All of those organisations have supported this bill.It is hugely important that the land transfer system provides people and businesses with secure property rights. This is because of its importance to many New Zealanders. As we understand for many of those the purchase of their home is probably their greatest investment—the most expensive investment that they will make in their lifetime. This bill maintains the core principles of the current land registration system and it introduces improvements that secure property rights. It is a very much needed update to our legislative work and I have pleasure in commending it to the House.