edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
5. Question No. 5—DefenceMARK PATTERSON (NZ First) to the Minister of DefenceQuestion No. 5—Defence5. MARK PATTERSON (NZ First) to the Minister of Defence: What support is the New Zealand Defence Force providing to the Fox River clean-up effort?Hon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): Thank you Mr Speaker. Since 20 June the New Zealand Defence Force has been supporting a Department of Conservation - led clean-up under the code name Operation Tidy Fox in the Fox River area of the West Coast that was impacted by severe flooding. With tonnes of rubbish strewn across two of the region's pristine rivers and coastline over an area equivalent to 3000 rugby fields the need for the Defence Force to respond alongside of the Department of Conservation volunteers in support of the West Coast community was clear. Accordingly in mid-August the New Zealand Defence Force is deploying in phases up to 70 personnel vehicles and aircraft to support the Fox River clean-up with further helicopter support planned to help remove rubbish from more remote locations later.Mark Patterson: How does this effort support the coalition Government's defence policy?Hon RON MARK: Fifty-three personnel are currently—I'm sorry did I get the wrong supplementary?SPEAKER: While the member's doing it can he tell the House why the operation was named after him?Hon RON MARK: After—ha ha! Sorry Mr Speaker; I'll start the question again. As part of the Strategic Defence Policy Statement 2018 the coalition Government reshaped New Zealand's defence policy in the context of delivering value to the community the nation and the world. Defence now has a specific outcome to support New Zealand's communities their environmental wellbeing and their resilience. This recognises the Defence Force's role to communities—the communities from which it draws its personnel and the communities from which it needs and accrues support.SPEAKER: Order! Order! That's enough thank you.Mark Patterson: How many New Zealand Defence Force personnel are currently operating in the area and what tasks are they undertaking?Hon RON MARK: Currently there are 53 personnel deployed in the area taking part in the clean-up itself and supporting the Department of Conservation's incident management team with a further 11 personnel deploying by tomorrow. Eight vehicles are deployed including light operational vehicles to transport personnel and the medium heavy operational vehicles affectionately known as MHOVs which have been used to transport the collected rubbish.
2. Question No. 2—Energy and ResourcesPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) to the Minister of Energy and ResourcesQuestion No. 2—Energy and Resources2. PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What announcements has she made about energy-efficient heating sources as part of the Government's Warmer Kiwi Homes programme?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Energy and Resources): Last Thursday I was pleased to announce that grants are now available for energy-efficient heating sources as part of the Government's Warmer Kiwi Homes programme. The grants cover two-thirds of the cost of efficient wood burners and heat pumps up to a maximum of $2500. This latest announcement follows the launch of the targeted insulation programme last year and I am happy to inform members that the first heat pump has been installed and thousands of Kiwis have already had their homes insulated. Priyanca Radhakrishnan: Who's eligible for the grants?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Owner-occupiers with a Community Services Card or who live in a lower-income area are eligible to receive a grant for an energy-efficient heat source. Homeowners can be referred via the Ministry of Health's Healthy Homes Initiative. In most cases the house will need to have ceiling and underfloor insulation already installed to ensure the homeowner gains maximum benefit from the heating source. Priyanca Radhakrishnan: How does this fit with the Government's broader ambition to keep Kiwis healthy and warm over winter? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Helping insulate homes and installing energy-efficient heat sources will mean thousands of Kiwis can stay warm and healthy over winter and they'll use less electricity. This Government is also providing the winter energy payment to help nearly a million New Zealanders with their electricity bills. In the coming months I'll be releasing the Government's response to the Electricity Price Review to make sure power bills are kept in check.
Russell DeborahDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn): I have just joined the select committee which examined this bill and so I have just taken a look at some of the submissions that have come in. I am in particular looking at the submission from the Blind Foundation where in their submission they say that one of the benefits of this bill is it will help to end the book famine that print-disabled people still face. I think that is a critical advantage of this bill.Last year a young woman came to see me in my electorate. She was working with the Parliamentary Champions for Accessibility Legislation and she spoke to me about the difficulties she faces as a university student trying to access textbooks which she can use. This legislation helps to address that issue in particular and that is why I commend this bill to the House.
Radhakrishnan PriyancaPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. It is actually a real pleasure to stand and take a call at the second reading of the Copyright (Marrakesh Treaty Implementation) Amendment Bill because at the end of the day this bill is about equity. It's about—DEPUTY SPEAKER: My apologies it is a split call.PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Yes yes it is a split call. So this bill is ultimately at the heart of it about equity. It's about us as a nation being able to accede to the Marrakesh Treaty which will then facilitate published works to be published in a format that is accessible to those with a print disability. That's what this bill ultimately is about.Now only 10 percent of all written materials published internationally are actually published in formats that are accessible to people with a print disability. This particular bill will allow us to amend the Copyright Act 1994 that we currently have in order for us to as I mentioned previously accede to this treaty that is a multilateral treaty that was negotiated by the World Intellectual Property Organization specifically to ensure that those with a print disability have increased access to the types of materials that they need to remove some of the barriers that they experience to participation in public life in employment opportunities and in educational opportunities and actually allow them to participate fully as is their right.As we've heard 55 countries have actually signed up to this treaty. Given that this is a second reading one of the main amendments from the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee was the removal of the commercial availability test. But my colleague Gareth Hughes has actually laid out in a lot of detail the rationale behind removing that as was the recommendation of the committee and as is in this bill. So I don't feel the need to traverse that.I'll just finish by saying that once again this is about access it's about reducing cost and it's about equity. I'm very happy to commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Falloon AndrewANDREW FALLOON (National—Rangitata): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'm very pleased to take a call this afternoon on the second reading of the Copyright (Marrakesh Treaty Implementation) Amendment Bill which of course gives effect to the Marrakesh Treaty. I've been waiting a few days for this bill actually. It started debate on Tuesday and then I expected it to come up on Wednesday—the only person I have to blame for that actually is Mr Chris Penk and his enthusiasm for the Trusts Bill. So I'm pleased we've progressed that and we can now move on to the Copyright (Marrakesh Treaty Implementation) Amendment Bill. I do want this bill to pass reasonably speedily because it has been in I guess gestation for a long time. As Ron Mark's noted it goes back till about October 2015 I think when the National Government of the time put out a discussion document asking for feedback on whether or not New Zealand should join up to the Marrakesh Treaty. The overwhelming feedback from that process was positive that we should join so that then proceeded on to June 2017 when the National Government of the time did agree to sign up to the treaty. As Ron Mark and other members have noted this bill has come from the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee which I do sit on. I do actually want to note the contribution in particular of Gareth Hughes. Some people today have talked about the removal of the commercial availability test and actually a lot of that came down to Gareth Hughes' contribution which—we're a very collegial committee; we get on very very well. The idea came from Gareth Hughes and we all readily agreed with it because we thought it was a sensible thing to do. Of course we did weigh it up at length but ultimately all members of the committee came to the view that Mr Hughes was correct and that it should be removed. I do just want to finish off by noting a couple of the points of the bill. Of course there are about 168000 people who are unfortunately in some way print-disabled. So this bill will be of huge benefit to many of those people. That's the reason that we'll be supporting this bill and I commend it to the House.
Mark RonHon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'm rising to indicate New Zealand First's continued support for this piece of legislation. I think the bill's aim purpose and content has been very well debated. The report back is quite clear. I'll just acknowledge a couple of things. Firstly this work is a continuation of work that was started under the previous Government. We acknowledge that. We acknowledged that the select committee that heard the submissions was well and ably chaired by Jonathan Young. I acknowledge Tamati Coffey Andrew Falloon Hon Paul Goldsmith Gareth Hughes Melissa Lee Jo Luxton Clayton Mitchell Hon Poto Williams and Lawrence Yule and also Brett Hudson who participated throughout some of the consideration for their studiousness and their diligence in considering this piece of legislation. The aim and purpose has been well canvassed.I just want to draw attention to one thing that's probably a hallmark of the committee's work. I refer to the comments made by the Hon Kris Faafoi—and congratulations to him on his most well-deserved elevation into Cabinet; a very hard-working conscientious Minister in this coalition Government. I'm very pleased that you've been elevated. I want to acknowledge the comments that he made which I think are a very good reflection on the quality of the work done by the committee. That bill was reported back from select committee with the unanimous recommendations that it be passed with amendments. Most of the amendments are minor but are intended to clarify some aspects of the bill the most significant amendment being the removal of the commercial availability test. I think that's something that's been well discussed by Opposition members of the committee.I want to say that the Minister's acknowledgment of that work agreement with the recommendations of the select committee report and acceptance of all those amendments probably is a very good reflection on the quality of the work conducted by the select committee. I congratulate them. I congratulate the Minister. We support the bill.
Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
Ngāti Rangi Claims Settlement Bill — Third Reading
Ngāti Rangi Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee
Speaker's Rulings — Personal Votes — Proxy Voting
Little Andrew; Tolley AnneNGĀTI RANGI CLAIMS SETTLEMENT BILLIn CommitteeHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations): I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one debate.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): That leave is sought; I'll put that to the committee. Any objection? There is none.Parts 1 to 4 Schedules 1 to 9 and clauses 1 and 2Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations): Following the Māori Affairs Committee's consideration of the Ngāti Rangi Claims Settlement Bill there have been some minor technical amendments required to bring the bill into order. Supplementary Order Paper 256 makes technical amendments to the bill largely to correct the legal description of a reserve site listed in Schedule 4 Part 1 of the bill. These amendments are minor; they do not change the redress package. For the benefit of Ngāti Rangi members who are in the gallery we are just going through a bit of a tidy-up so the bill is absolutely pristine and perfect by the time we get to the third reading which should be in a matter of minutes and then we will be all go for that final step the last hurdle and then a cause for a great celebration.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 256 in the name of the Hon Andrew Little be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Parts 1 to 4 Schedules 1 to 9 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.House resumed.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.
Hipkins Chris; Woodhouse Michael; Seymour DavidBUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): The legislation to be considered next week will include the first reading of the National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill (No 2) the second reading of the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill and the Financial Markets (Derivatives Margin and Benchmarking) Reform Amendment Bill and the remaining stages of the Copyright (Marrakesh Treaty Implementation) Amendment Bill. The Parihaka Reconciliation Bill will receive its second reading on Thursday 1 August and Wednesday 31 July will be a members' day. Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): I thank the Leader of the House for the update. I wonder if he could inform the House whether he has considered curtailing this session or increasing the number of members' days given the very light Government business on the Order Paper right now. Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): There's certainly no intention on the part of the Government to curtail the business of the House or the sitting of the House—we're having too much fun. I would point out to the member however that as at the end of June this year the Parliament has passed more legislation than at any point at this time of the year over the last decade. Of course I would point out though that in those previous years however we haven't ever had an Opposition quite as distracted and divided as the current Opposition are. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Has the Leader of the House considered adding to the fun by bringing the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill up the Order Paper? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): There's only so much fun I can tolerate at any given time.
O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Firstly thank you Mr Speaker for these considerations and I'll certainly take up as I'm sure other members will a more personal conversation. I think I'm somewhat echoing what the Rt Hon David Carter has raised but I'd just like to signal to you and to the House that we may be conflating the ideas of concept and principle. I'm in complete agreeance that this House through second reading has agreed in concept to the idea of the bill but when you move in to elements of principles you may be unwittingly or unfairly narrowing the scope without consideration. You've raised the issue around obviously health practitioners—sorry medical practitioners I think are the words that you—SPEAKER: Medical personnel.SIMON O'CONNOR: Excellent—medical personnel. If I may then just as an example of what that has now achieved: medical personnel" is actually only doctors and so we're no longer allowed to actually discuss the notion of say nurses or other professionals but—SPEAKER: No I am going to interrupt the member. I think the member is over-interpreting what I've said. I advise members to read carefully the ruling. If there is an issue with it that they think is inconsistent with the Standing Orders or previous Speakers' rulings or McGee or Erskine May we'll have a discussion about that. This is meant to be very deliberately a ruling of current precedent and not an indication of any sort of new ruling or change in Speakers' rulings. It's more a matter of clarifying and bringing together some of the various Standing Orders and Speakers' rulings that I'm sure not all of us are fully acquainted with."
Parker David; Mallard TrevorHon DAVID PARKER (Attorney-General): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Yes I'm one of the members who came to see you to clarify proxies because I'm overseas next week for Government business. I just want to be clear that if I complete a proxy only in respect of substantive votes there is no risk that in respect of procedural motions I can't rely upon a party vote because if there is I have to give that proxy before I leave.SPEAKER: No. As far as party votes are concerned the normal proxy arrangements will pertain and those are the 25 percent limit for a party. If a member has a view on any procedural matter which differs from his party then he or she should indicate that to the party whip so that the party whip can exercise a split vote.Hon DAVID PARKER (Attorney-General): So do I have to give a proxy to my whip in respect of procedural motions or can I just rely upon the party to take—SPEAKER: They are party votes of the normal sort. They don't require proxies to be given over and above the standard arrangements.
Carter David; Mallard TrevorRt Hon DAVID CARTER (National): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just want take the opportunity of thanking you for setting out the rules but express my concern that you're saying the principles have been established. I look at Standing Order 302; I don't think that reinforces your position at all. I wasn't here for the debate but I'm aware that a number of people actually stated in their contributions that they were prepared to vote for it to proceed for the opportunity then to discuss it further in committee stages and they reserved their right to change their position completely for the third reading. With you establishing those principles by which you're operating and saying already this House has determined in principle that we will have assisted dying I strongly disagree with that and I'm happy to raise that point with you privately.SPEAKER: Sorry—if I've been confusing I apologise. I did try and make clear right at the end that the House will make a decision on the third reading on the bill that emerges. I'm as aware as any other member that there's a range of views on this bill and that there are a lot of individuals and some groups of individuals whose further support of the bill is contingent on changes being made. As far as I'm aware none of those changes involve the principles as I outlined them.
Wednesday 24 July 2019 - Volume 739
12. Question No. 12—ConservationSARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill) to the Minister of ConservationQuestion No. 12—Conservation12. SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill) to the Minister of Conservation: Will the full findings and any recommendations from the consultation on whitebait management which she announced last October be publicly released before the committee stage of the Conservation (Indigenous Freshwater Fish) Amendment Bill? Hon EUGENIE SAGE (Minister of Conservation): A reported entitled New Zealanders' views on whitebait management: Summary of findings from a public engagement process was released on 16 May this year is available on the Department of Conversation's website and has been there for the last two months for the member to read. Sarah Dowie: Will she therefore delay the committee stage of her bill to allow for cross-referencing of submissions between the two processes she has been running ensuring an appropriate balance between conservation and fishing for whitebait? Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The report has been on the Department of Conservation's website for two months so members of the Environment Committee have had that report available. I look forward to the report back of the Conservation (Indigenous Freshwater Fish) Amendment Bill and the recommendations of the select committee. That bill will provide an improved tool box for managing our freshwater fish. Sarah Dowie: Why would she not ensure transparency and that the fullest and most informed feedback from her consultation about the impact on recreational fishers was inserted into that select committee process when in front of the select committee is a bill that will give her the power to close that fishery? Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The member doesn't appear to have been listening. As a result of the public engagement which the Department of Conservation has done and the publication of that report I have asked the department to develop a consultation document on improvements to the management of the whitebait fishery. Fewer controls apply to whitebait than to any other commercial recreational or sports fishery. There will be public consultation on any changes to the regulations. The overwhelming thrust of the public engagement that was summarised in that report has been a recognition that management needs to improve. That is why this Government is acting to improve it. Sarah Dowie: Will she guarantee New Zealanders that fishing for whitebait from their family stand or buying a fritter at their local cafe will continue if her bill becomes law? Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The member misconstrues the purpose of the bill. The bill does not ban whitebait fishing. It will provide better tools to enable better regulations to manage the fishery so that it is sustainable—a concern that came through strongly in the public engagement in the report which the member obviously hasn't read. Sarah Dowie: Will Edmonds need to remove whitebait fritters from their cookbook under a Eugenie Sage whitebait regime? Hon EUGENIE SAGE: No.
3. Question No. 3—TourismWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of TourismQuestion No. 3—Tourism3. WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of Tourism: What recent announcements has he made about helping local communities improve their tourism infrastructure? Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister of Tourism): Last week I announced $1.1 million in co-funding to restore the mauri of Matapōuri. Earlier this year local hapū Te Whānau ā Rangiwhakaahu placed a rāhui over Te Wai o Te Taniwha—the Mermaid Pools—in response to the real environmental challenges they were facing from increasing visitor numbers and a lack of infrastructure. The funding will go towards new public toilets changing rooms car-park upgrades waste-water quality treatment and rubbish and recycling facilities. The benefits of this funding to the visitor experience as well as in restoring and protecting this great area will be felt for years to come. Willow-Jean Prime: What further initiatives has he implemented to help local communities manage the challenges and opportunities of tourism visitor growth? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Strong visitor growth has increased the opportunities and benefits of tourism but it has also highlighted the challenges that come with it and this Government is responding to these challenges in a number of ways: implementing the New Zealand - Aotearoa Government Tourism Strategy which sets out our plan to take a more active role in tourism so that tourism growth is productive sustainable and inclusive; setting up the responsible camping working group with a $16.5 million investment over two summers for infrastructure education and enforcement projects; and the international visitor conservation and tourism levy which is expected to raise $450 million over five years for sustainable tourism infrastructure and to protect our natural environment. Our plan is to make sure the benefits of tourism are realised for our country and our people while managing the impacts.
2. Question No. 2—Prime MinisterHon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime MinisterQuestion No. 2—Prime Minister2. Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government's statements policies and actions? Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN (Prime Minister): Yes with enthusiasm. Hon Simon Bridges: What transport projects has her Government started? Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Of course we had a lengthy discussion about that yesterday. In fact we talked a little bit about the projects that he long hailed but actually put no designational funding into and I'd be happy to spend a bit of time on that. But instead let's talk about the $49 million that went into the Manukau Bus Station in Auckland; State Highway 20A the shared walking and cycle path in June 2018; the Ian McKinnon Drive walking and cycling shared path; the $45 million in the Maungatapu underpass on State Highway 29: the Paengaroa to Rotoiti cycle trail; the State Highway 2 Woodlands to Ōpōtiki shared path; the $112 million into the Russley Road upgrade including Memorial Avenue Gateway Bridge; the State Highway 1 Barters Road and Pound Road improvements—and that's in Christchurch—the safety barriers that went in around Queen Elizabeth II Drive; State Highway 74 from Marshland to Burwood in Christchurch—SPEAKER: Order! Order! I hesitate to interrupt the Prime Minister because it was a pretty open question but I think the House has had enough. Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I actually only managed to get to Wellington. I still had Otago Manawatū Hawke's Bay Queenstown Taranaki and the top of the South Island which I wanted to cover. SPEAKER: The Prime Minister might want to table—[Interruption] [Speaker indicates that the Opposition has lost two supplementary questions]Rt Hon Winston Peters: On the issue of transport can she confirm that that great and essential but deliberately run down asset called railways is being now revived under her Government? Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes and not only are we providing commuter rail services for instance between Auckland and Hamilton but we're also working to ensure we get freight off our roads which does contribute to safety issues as well as wear and tear and it is something that regional New Zealand has long wanted. A billion dollars has gone into rail in the last Budget and that's for very good reason: it will make a big difference for transport.
Radhakrishnan PriyancaPRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's with great delight that I rise to take a call on the Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill because as they say water is life. They absolutely say that and they say that for a reason. I just want to pick up on the point that our colleague from the Green Party the Hon Eugenie Sage made so well and that's about safeguarding the sources of our drinking water and just how important that is from a sustainable development point of view. Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 10 p.m.
Macindoe TimHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): Yes that's fine Madam Speaker. I will be fairly brief. In fact I was hoping this bill would be able to be finished tonight for the sake of the people of Havelock North. This is a very important measure and I think it's been well debated. I'm very pleased to see that the House has worked well. I particularly commend the Health Committee for the way that they worked and also the local authorities and others who have managed to bring it to this part. Havelock North is a town very dear to my heart. I was married there and my parents-in-law have lived there for many many decades and still do. So I feel for that community and join with others who have expressed condolences to members of that community who in some cases lost their lives and in many other cases were very very ill. As I say I think this has been well debated. I particularly wish to associate myself with the comments of the Hon Michael Woodhouse earlier in this debate. I think he summed it up very well and I am delighted to support this measure.
Barry MaggieHon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): Thank you I'll cut straight to the chase. The Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill at its third reading is every bit as good as it was at its second reading and its first reading. The points remain the same. The bill is one we all support and I commend it the House.
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. This is a very important bill that I think we would like to see passed tonight so I commend this bill to the House.
Reti ShaneDr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to speak to this the third reading of the Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill. As others have spoken and commented before this this was precipitated by the Havelock North inquiry of 2016. I've broken the responses to that inquiry down into three: a short-term medium-term and long-term response.The short-term response to the Havelock North inquiry was to remind all providers of their obligations under the Act. So it was a reminder for the existing legislation that these were the standards that were required to be met and that gave a little bit of time for the medium-term response which I'll talk to here in a moment to follow along. That response that medium-term response is what we're doing here now. This is the legislation which tidies up pieces of the Act enabling it and making it basically more effective.I think the longer-term response is kind of interesting because that's what's not being covered by this bill and what's been indicated to us by officials is there's work still to progress. That includes the process of disinfection potentially disinfection of water supplies and the definition of various parts of water—potable non-potable as well. So there's still an ongoing water response from the Havelock North inquiry.Before I came down to the House I went to my local district health board (DHB) had a look at their drinking-water assessment unit and matched it to some of the parts of this bill that we've been working on and looked at their water safety plan and their information on drinking water and household and roof supplies. I was very pleased to see the Northland DHB water safety plan was very complete very detailed and really structured. It doesn't mean that we don't have water-borne outbreaks in Northland—other regions do as well—but I was really pleased to see the advice that was there on the Northland DHB website and how neatly and tidily it mapped to what we're talking about here tonight.I think really that's mostly what I wanted to contribute to this part of the bill. I want to acknowledge the Health Committee and the submitters. We had an excellent range of submitters including local government district health boards and plumbers. We had International Accreditation New Zealand and we had iwi submit as well so I want to thank them also and I commend this bill forward.
Woodhouse MichaelHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. I want to commend the Minister for his thoroughness if not his succinctness. With 35 minutes to go before the end of the night I think if we can be as crisp as I intend to be in my intervention on the third reading we may well get this bill through into law. Because actually I think we owe it to the 5000 people who were affected by the contamination in Havelock North the more than four dozen people who were admitted to hospital as a consequence of that and the families of at least three people whose lives were believed to have been curtailed as a consequence of their exposure to the contaminants.This was an extremely serious issue and I commend the Government in moving on this. I support the Minister's enthusiasm for the second phase of this to be brought forward and I and my colleague the Hon Jacqui Dean our spokesperson for local government will be watching very closely for the Minister of Local Government's work in the substantive body of the changes to give effect to the recommendations of the Havelock North inquiry. But now with 34 minutes to go I want to commend the Government and I'll commend the bill. I support it.
New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Waikato DHB) Elections Bill — Third Reading
Wagner NickyHon NICKY WAGNER (National): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. This bill is a sensible bill and unlike the previous speaker Kieran McAnulty National is very happy to talk about its sense. National will support it because there are significant issues within the Waikato District Health Board (DHB). The reason for this is that National prides itself on making responsible and evidence-based decisions. We're supporting the Government in this tough decision because it's the right thing to do. And I just note that this is totally opposite behaviour to the hysterical political behaviour of Labour and the Greens when the National Government had to make a similar decision about Environment Canterbury in Canterbury. However I'd like to make the point that the Waikato is not alone in having a deficit and I urge the Minister and the Government to step up and support DHBs across the country so that they can perform successfully to deliver the healthcare that New Zealanders want need and must have going forward. We all know that organisations are only able to perform well when they can measure their performance. If you can't measure your performance you can't manage your performance. So with the Minister dumping the DHB health targets there are now no measures so that deficit blowout can be expected. What we're seeing now is that blowout is looking at about being $500 million across the country and that is a disaster for New Zealanders. It's a disaster for their health needs and I am really concerned about the suffering that we might see because these DHBs are not performing the way they should be. So as I commend this bill to the House I also want to highlight the need for effective performance measurements and targets so that the DHBs have a chance to deliver good outcomes for New Zealanders and keep their deficits under control. Thank you Madam Speaker.
Barry MaggieHon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): Thank you Madam Speaker. Before I begin my call I'd like to say to the member Angie Warren-Clark that I hope her husband makes a full recovery from the perils of the black sand and enjoys having the story recollected for the nation. I've heard many interesting points made tonight on the New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Waikato DHB) Elections Bill at its third reading. I was here for its first reading and its second reading and for members who are familiar with the movie Groundhog Day you will understand that I could probably recite some of the phrases and scripts that have been repeated endlessly about this particular bill.In its essence it exempts the Waikato District Health Board from this year's triennial general election but instead allows them to have their election in the 2022 triennial general election. That's it in a nutshell. There are a number of permutations that have been alluded to by others. The Minister's was my particular favourite. He thanked everybody who ever had anything to do with the bill and their parents and their sisters and it was marvellous. It was a long roll call and I think everybody has been thanked. Everything has been said that needs to be said. I will not add to this filibustering business. I will instead commend this bill to the House because I think—perhaps with the exception of the Chamber's least predictable voter the member for Epsom—this bill does enjoy unanimous support from the House. So let us delay no longer. Let's go with the bill the New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Waikato DHB) Elections Bill at its third reading. I commend it to the House.
van de Molen TimTIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise to take a call on this—a brief call. It has been pretty well canvassed and whilst we acknowledge the need for this suspension of democracy in this particular instance it's not something that we encourage on a regular basis of course. But noting the points that have been raised earlier on in this instance we are supporting it.Of course there are some concerns around the wider trend with district health boards (DHBs) in particular with the deficits that we're seeing now being presented by numerous DHBs around the country and those deficits that have been exacerbated significantly over the last 20 months seem to suggest that the DHBs don't have respect for the Minister and feel they can walk all over him and pull the wool over his eyes. So whilst that may well be happening there's certainly a concern for us and again we've seen Auckland DHB just come out today saying now they're posting a deficit without identifying what that figure might be which suggests it will be quite large. If the Government's assumption then is on the basis of a deficit to presume that a commissioner must be appointed well the question is of course as Mr Woodhouse rightly pointed out Who's next?" So that is a concern we have but on this particular occasion in the Waikato it's the right instance. So I commend this bill to the House."
van de Molen Tim; Rurawhe AdrianTIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Thank you Mr Speaker. Look I appreciate there's some difference of perspectives but for the Green Party member Chlöe Swarbrick to be moving and interjecting from a seat in the front row of Labour's benches is outside the Standing Orders I'm sure you'd agree. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Yeah no it is out of—I didn't hear her interject. So your hearing's obviously better than mine if you did.
Trusts Bill — Third Reading
Hipango HareteHARETE HIPANGO (National—Whanganui): In rising to take a call this evening I'm entrusted—as the last speaker there's going to be a few trust puns coming along this evening in this address. But I am entrusted as was the last speaker for the National Party in addressing the House succinctly on the Trusts Bill which has engendered cross-party and cross-the-House support and some measure of trust.I take heed of the member Greg O'Connor who's just recently addressed the House in reference to archaeological digs with the criminal inquiries and some of the searches that came out of that so I look across the House and reference in terms of archaeological and the antiquated artefacts that are there. Since 1956 the Trustees Act has been around as long as some of the members here in the House this evening and also the Perpetuities Act of 1964 which is long overdue for a reworking. So this is a bill which will entrust trusting New Zealanders who utilise and rely of course on the legal workings and mechanisms and mechanics of a trust. It's been referenced that there's some estimated half a million trusts in Aotearoa New Zealand. So of course with this reform of the laws the trustees and the beneficiaries and those who are working the mechanics of this trust law are to be significantly aided by the reforms under this bill. The sole purpose is to clarify and simplify the core trust law principles making the legislation more useful clear consistent pragmatic effective and efficient.So for what indeed has been too long a time for this reform to come about like many human relationships of course the dynamics are akin to the impact by trusts impacted by trust law which are fraught complex unclear complicated costly and perhaps even dysfunctional. So this trust bill when it is passed into law is going to unravel all of that complexity and complication and make it more effective more efficient and easier to apply. So it does give a distinct clarity to trustees and beneficiaries' responsibilities duties entitlements and expectations under the law as to the fair just and responsible administration of trust law.So this is soon to be trusted and a trustworthy bill. I am now entrusted and trustily commend this to the House with the third reading and passage soon into law.Dan Bidois: What a trusty speech.HARETE HIPANGO: Trust me I'm over it! Thank you.
Bidois DanDAN BIDOIS (National—Northcote): It's a pleasure to speak in the third and final reading of the Trusts Bill. We are supporting this bill so you can trust me not to speak too long on this important Trusts Bill—but I digress. I just do want to acknowledge the hard work of not just this Parliament but the previous Parliament and the select committee for bringing this bill to the stage that it is where it's going to be voted on this evening in the third and final reading. Particular thanks to our previous Minister of Justice Amy Adams—great Minister—and also Andrew Little for his work and contribution as well as the select committees. This bill is actually a very important bill. People say it's a technical bill—whatever that means—but trusts have a really important part to play in our legal system. We have anywhere between 300000 and 500000 trusts in New Zealand and a whole variety of New Zealanders families and individuals use these legal instruments as a way to structure their affairs. So this bill essentially tidies up a lot of the legal structure around trusts simplifies a lot of the important legislation around trusts clarifies matters around legal responsibilities for trustees for trusts themselves and basically helps to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the trust system in New Zealand. So without further ado I just want to say that I will be commending this bill to the House.
Penk Chris; Rurawhe AdrianCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Mr Speaker. The bill has been pretty thoroughly canvassed as recently as yesterday so I'm conscious of how much disappointment it will cause across the aisle—I probably don't need to spend a terribly great length of time about it. I'll just note obviously in general terms that trusts are very important vehicles for ownership of assets protection of assets. Other previous contributors to the debate have gone through some of those different categories including I think it is worth highlighting that they do allow ownership on a non-individual basis in a way that's valuable to certain sectors of our society and therefore it's worth having some good clear solid law in place that enables them to know with some exactitude what their rights and responsibilities are—the settlors the trustees and of course the beneficiaries. The purpose of the Act as set out there is pretty clearly stated: a reforming of the law a reshaping; a re-form in that sense but also one that is making it better and quite a conscious effort to be very clear about express trusts in particular—those which are set up in a very conscious fashion. I'll just make my final note in relation to the law of perpetuities. Ironically as a law student it took me for ever to understand the rule against the perpetuities and so the codification of that and the abolition of the common law rule about that subject is a welcome step I think for all concerned. So with no further ado I commend the bill to the House as we do on this side and the others too and all those involved in its passage.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): This is a split call. I call Priyanca Radhakrishnan—five minutes.
Macindoe TimHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'll begin by acknowledging both the Minister of Justice and the chair of the committee and thank them for their very detailed outlines of the purposes of this bill which of course has reached its third reading. I won't need to trouble the scorer for too long with my thoughts on this bill other than to say that I'm delighted to see another excellent piece of National Party legislation—Dr Duncan Webb: Ha ha! Tell us all you know about trusts.Hon TIM MACINDOE: —coming to the House. I also would like to say to the chair that I'm very much looking forward to rejoining the Justice Committee tomorrow. I haven't been on it since 2013 but I used to be the chair of that committee from after the 2011 election until I became a whip early in 2013 and I'm delighted that following my recent appointment as the shadow Attorney-General I am going to be back there tomorrow. Dr Webb has asked me to give him the benefit of my considerable knowledge of this bill. I have to say Dr Webb that looking back over my probably not very distinguished legal studies I recall that studying the law of trusts was probably the area of study that I least looked forward to and did at times have trouble getting my head around. So I was quite reassured to hear the previous speakers acknowledge that trust law is a very complex area of legislation and in fact has been unnecessarily complex in New Zealand. That of course is why the Law Commission did its excellent work when it reviewed trust law back in the early years of the John Key - led Government and that has led to the update that we have before us today. Of course this is a serious topic. Trusts are an absolutely essential part of our legal system with up to around half a million trusts operating in New Zealand today. So it is important that the law is up to date and that it reflects contemporary demands both for New Zealand individuals but also for the way that businesses need to be able to operate with certainty within the law and with a minimum of complexity so that they can navigate their way around the law. This bill does indeed give that better guidance to the trustees and beneficiaries so that it will enable them better to resolve disputes to clarify and simplify the core trust principles to make our trust legislation more useful more contemporary and to fix practical problems and it is to be hoped and to be expected indeed that it will reduce costs overall. It doesn't of course codify trust law in New Zealand. It's important to make that point. The changes will largely reflect existing common law decisions to preserve flexibility. So while there is possibly more that I could say—I'll leave it to others to do that—I now have to go and attend an event and I'm pleased to know that I'm finishing just on time.
Mitchell MarkHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): Thank you Madam Speaker. Can I just take the opportunity—it's the first time I've spoken in the House since your appointment as Assistant Speaker—to congratulate you on your appointment. I understand from the select committee today with you that I am on your list; I'm not sure what that means but I hope that it has a positive outcome for me anyway. Can I just acknowledge the Minister. He's clinging to this bill as hard as he can. The Minister is clinging to this bill as hard as he can because it is a very good bill. It's a fantastic bill. It's a bill that Amy Adams worked up and did all the work on and I feel sorry for him. The reason why the Minister is clinging to this bill so hard is that the only other bill that the Government's actually been able to introduce to this House is a bill called the Ombudsmen's bill and the Ombudsmen's bill does basically nothing for nobody whereas this Trusts Bill is actually going to have a massively positive impact on people and on Kiwis who are involved in trusts and as the Minister said there are many of them.Historically the law around trusts has been very complex and the great thing about this bill is that it's removing some of that complexity. It's going to be far more practical and usable. It's going to reduce costs and compliance costs and it's also going to provide a much better resolution for disputes between beneficiaries and trustees. So it is a very good piece of legislation. Can I acknowledge the select committee and the chair of the select committee who's in the House. Can I acknowledge Chris Penk my colleague who took over and was in charge of the Trusts Bill and shepherding it through the House for us. I take great pleasure in commending this bill to the House. Thank you.