edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Foster-Bell Paul: Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9996. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): E Te Mana Whakawā tēnā koe. I have to actually reject some of the suggestions in the diatribe of the previous speaker Damien O’Connor. With regard to the Department of Conservation’s (DOC) budget even the functionally innumerate should be able to see from looking at the budget.govt.nz website that last year the DOC was given a budget of $450 million an increase of $50 million over what it spent in the year before. So there has been a real increase in the resource going in.But I think we should also make a very important point about this Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill in this first reading debate and that is that these additional powers that are being granted to the DOC rangers so that they can take action to stop the poaching of our most previous and endangered species are being done within existing baselines. They do not carry an extra cost. These are extra enforcement powers that will allow DOC rangers to take action to prevent an offence from happening to seize a broader range of evidence—including those kinds of modern gadgets that modern poachers use such as cameras and cellphones—and to require identification details from suspected offenders in addition to the arrest power which will apply to the absolutely protected species.This is a very good bill proposed by the very fine Minister of Conservation the Hon Maggie Barry one of the finest champions of conservation in New Zealand. I would note that when the Wildlife Act 1953 was put into place Sir Sidney Holland was the Prime Minister and now we have a John Key - led Government and this is just one of its many conservation and environmental initiatives. It seems that National is the true champion of our environment and conservation.It is a very fine bill. It will get an excellent hearing under our committee chair Scott Simpson that absolute quintessential Bluegreen from the Coromandel. For all of these reasons I commend the bill to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9995. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The Hon Damien O’Connor—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9994. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call—Eugenie Sage 5 minutes.
Hayes Joanne: Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9994. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): My contribution will be short to the point and will not waffle around like the previous speaker Clayton Mitchell’s one did. I want to thank Minister Maggie Barry for bringing this bill to the House. I think it is a really good bill.In a nutshell—this is what I have written down—this bill gives—[Interruption] Are we listening? This bill gives powers to Department of Conservation (DOC) staff and others to protect our native fauna by stopping the perpetrators asking for proof and penalising them through prosecution. In turn the perpetrators receive persecution from the peoples of this country if not a ban preventing them from access to New Zealand for the next 10 years. That basically puts into a nutshell the whole purpose of this bill and I am very proud to stand and support it. I cannot wait for it to come to our select committee because the sooner it gets there the sooner it can be enacted and we can start implementing this piece of legislation immediately. I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.
Kuriger Barbara: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKuriger Barbara: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9979. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): It is a pleasure to take a call on the New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill tonight. I just wanted to start off with a small quote that I picked up today when I was doing some research. It is from our Prime Minister when he was visiting the kiwifruit industry in 2015. He said: “Either we are going to be the people that stand up and sell wine and kiwifruit and lamb and a million other things we are good at or alternatively someone else is going to supply it and if they do we will miss that opportunity.” I really see in supporting this piece of legislation that it is part of taking our opportunities.As previous speakers have mentioned there are nine horticultural export groups that are forming together in this piece of legislation which updates the 1987 Act. It is about collectively promoting the New Zealand Inc. brand. A previous speaker from the Green Party talked before about apologising for being selfish and standing up and supporting his region in terms of what it grows. Well no apology is necessary for doing that. It is something that we do all the time and I know that back home in my electorate of Taranaki - King Country we often talk about the ability to grow things being much easier than the collective ability to put them together and get them into the export market. Everything we do in terms of this piece of legislation is going to help that.I think it is also important as we look at this piece of legislation that it is going to clarify the powers of product groups to collect fees and levies to fund their export marketing strategies. I know from having 11 years of experience in a previous life with the board of Dairy New Zealand the importance of collecting that levy having a farmer vote and having support for the levy. It puts industries in control in terms of determining what they want to spend that money on. So I think it is really important that this is clarified. Another feature of this is it clarifies the requirement for product groups to enter into or exit from this framework. It gives greater certainty for this and reduces costs and I think that is important because it is really easy to collectively do something and enter and it needs to be very clearly understood how to exit at the same time otherwise it brings some grief down the track.The outlook looks good. By 2019 the export revenue for horticulture is expected to grow to more than $4.5 billion and that works out to be 16 percent growth over 4 years. I am part of the Primary Production Committee and I really look forward to being on the group. It is really pleasing to see that people are supporting this through its first reading and I look forward to progressing this bill as it works its way through Parliament. Thank you.
Borrows Chester: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9978. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A 5-minute call on behalf of the Labour Party—Rino Tirikatene.
Borrows Chester: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9976. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A 5-minute call on behalf of the Green Party—David Clendon.
Barclay Todd: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarclay Todd: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9976. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland): I just want to echo Mr Prosser’s sentiments towards our chairman of the Primary Production Committee Ian McKelvie. Before I start my short contribution regarding the New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill I just want to pass on my comments around how much I am enjoying working on the Primary Production Committee because as you will know Mr Deputy Speaker it is a very pragmatic committee made up of like-minded people all with the best interests at heart with regard to the exporting and the fruition of our exporters and producers and anybody operating from the primary sector. This bill as has been remarked on already is a small step in being able to make life easier for our horticultural exporters.As we know New Zealand is a small export-based economy. We have challenges around distance from our markets transport costs and just the general size of our economy. So anything we can do to modernise and strengthen and support the framework within which our exporters are operating at quite a disadvantage probably compared with a lot of other countries—that is a huge advantage that we can provide for them.The Act as has been mentioned has been in place now since about 1987 and over the last three decades a lot has happened including the birth of myself. So I think that probably provides an opportunity for having a relook at the framework and taking into consideration how the markets have changed and the playing field that our exporters among others are currently participating in.As we know dating back to about 1988 when there were $50 million of exports that arose from the fruit and vegetables exported under this Act that figure has now risen to about $300 million which shows that we have got new producers in the market that our current producers are producing more and exporting more and they are more reliant on the economies that we are exporting to. Enabling our horticultural producers to work together and maintain the integrity of the market and the brand as a premium export both collectively and individually is hugely important not only for them as individual producers and the industry but also for our country as an exporting nation.With that I would just like to offer my support again for the bill and I look forward to hearing submissions and engaging with the submitters over this process. Thank you.
Borrows Chester: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9968. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Tēnā koe e Te Whare tēnā koutou te whānau o Te Pāremata kia ora mai tātou tēnā tātou katoa.[Acknowledgments to the House to you the family of Parliament and to us all; cheers.]Members when we broke for the dinner break we were debating the New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill. The Hon Damien O’Connor was speaking and had the call and he has 25 seconds remaining to speak should he wish to avail himself of the privilege.
Tisch Lindsay: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9968. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member but the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. This debate is interrupted and I shall resume the Chair at 7.30 p.m.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Mallard Trevor: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9949. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): We are now debating Part 2. This is debate on clauses 12 to 117 schedules 2A to 8 and the substance of the bill.
Brownlee Gerry: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9931. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery): I just want to make the point before the debate starts this afternoon that the bill as tabled in the Committee incorporates a significant Supplementary Order Paper that was negotiated between the Government the Opposition parties and officials to ensure that we got a bill that reflects fully the views of the Parliament—those views essentially being that Regenerate Christchurch should take a central and lead role from this point as the city recovers from the events of the earthquakes.Over the last 5 years the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act has provided a legal basis for a lot of things to be fast tracked in the city as people were going about the business of getting their lives back intact. But now we have a situation where although some things that need to be done are not directly related to damage caused by the earthquakes they are most certainly consequential to it. For the concept of regenerating the city—recognising that some of the worst statistics that were on the table 5 years ago have not materialised and that people are making a huge commitment to the rebuild of the city—we need a legislative framework that will enable that to happen while respecting many of the aspects that would normally be pursued through consultation with communities etc. and of course we need a framework that will enable things to happen at a pace that will mean that Christchurch is not catching up with the rest of the country for decades and decades and decades.So I just start with those remarks. I am happy to answer questions as we go through the afternoon and I would like to once again convey thanks to all of the parties that participated in the seminar style that we deployed to get to a good and agreed position for this particular Act.
Smith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9931. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent announcements has he made regarding irrigation funding in Marlborough?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries): Recently I announced new funding of $895000 from the Irrigation Acceleration Fund for the Flaxbourne Community Irrigation Scheme in Marlborough. Water from this project is likely to be used for viticulture and arable crops demonstrating that irrigation is about much more than just dairy farming. Providing a reliable water supply for growers is especially important in Marlborough given the serious drought the region has suffered over the last 18 months. The scheme will source river water at peak-flow times for storage and irrigate 2200 hectares initially.Stuart Smith: How will the scheme help generate economic growth for the region?Hon NATHAN GUY: A very good question. A reliable water supply for growers has major potential to boost regional growth creating jobs and growing our overall exports. As the local member knows this project has the potential to boost Marlborough’s economy by around $15 million per year. We know that viticulture is a big employer and has significantly higher annual turnover than current dryland pasture uses. Illustrating the potential of this scheme is one grower who said he has just 3 percent of his land currently under irrigation but with this land accounting for 40 percent of his revenue.
Ngaro Alfred: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNgaro Alfred: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9925. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.ALFRED NGARO (National) to the Minister for Social Development: How will families in low-income households be better off due to the child hardship package coming into effect on 1 April?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): On 1 April the child hardship package comes into effect meaning that benefit rates for families with children will increase by $25 a week per family—the first real increase in 43 years. The package will also increase Working for Families rates by $12.50 per week for low-income families and by $24.50 per week for the very lowest-income families. These changes will help more than half a million New Zealand children and will lift incomes for over 100000 families with children in benefit-dependent homes.Alfred Ngaro: How will the child hardship package help parents into work?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: This Government believes that work is the best route out of poverty and we are focused on helping those on a benefit into employment. The package will require sole parents on a benefit to be available for part-time work once their youngest child turns 3. Additionally all sole parents and partners with part-time work obligations will be expected to find work for 20 hours a week rather than 15 hours as before. To balance the increased work obligations childcare assistance will also increase from $4 an hour to $5 an hour for very low-income families.
Dean Jacqui: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9923. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) to the Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment: What recent reports has he received on actual and forecast job growth?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment): Today the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment released its short-term employment forecast for 2016-19. It predicts 148000 additional new jobs will be created over the next 3 years through employment growth of an average of 2.1 percent annually over that period. This is broadly consistent with the recent forecast by the Reserve Bank of 146000 in the same period. This strong forecast builds off the latest household labour force survey which showed 175000 additional jobs were created over the last 3 years. It is encouraging to see robust job growth set to continue across the country. It shows that the work the Government is doing to maintain a strong and stable macroeconomic framework and develop the microeconomic with the Business Growth Agenda is delivering growth that will have positive effects.Jacqui Dean: Where is growth expected?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Job growth is expected to be widespread with employment growth rates forecast to be highest in the South Island particularly in Marlborough the West Coast and Otago over the next 3-year period. In terms of net job numbers Auckland and Canterbury will add the most workers respectively by 2019. Across industries the strongest job growth over the 3 years is expected in construction hospitality wholesale and retail trade and business services. Although much of the employment growth over the next 3 years will be in highly skilled occupations opportunities for lower-skilled workers are forecast to account for around 30 percent of that growth.Jacqui Dean: What reports has he seen on approaches that would halt job growth?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I have recently seen a number of reports that would remove incentives to work by significantly increasing personal tax rates. I have even recently seen some recommendations by various international commentators for some sort of universal basic income in New Zealand. It is a very 1970s approach that would remove the linkages between work and income and encourage people not to work. This would have a negative effect on employment growth. It is also a little ironic to note this recommendation is coming from international experts visiting New Zealand as New Zealand has the third highest rate of employment and the third highest rate of labour market participation in the OECD so you would think perhaps they might come here to see what we have actually been doing that could be right.
Mallard Trevor: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9918. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): This debate is interrupted and set down for resumption next sitting day. It now gives me pleasure to be part of a historic process and the House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday 29 March 2016.Debate interrupted.[To mark the retirement of the Serjeant-at-Arms Brent Smith members stood and applauded.]
Parmar Parmjeet: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParmar Parmjeet: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9914. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): I am taking a very short call to support the Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill in its first reading. It is really good to see the support for this bill.Just this morning I was in a meeting attended by my colleagues and some business people who are exporting 95 percent of their products. I asked them what the value of Made in New Zealand was to them and the answer was that it is huge. So this bill is about adding that value to our wine and spirit products. The reputation of products that are made here in New Zealand is important to us and if the geographical origin of wine and spirit products is registered giving a clear indication of the specific region it is coming from that will give confidence not only to consumers but also to makers because then they can claim a special place in the market especially the export market. I do not drink but I understand it is very important for those who do drink. I support this bill and commend this bill to the House. Thank you.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Primary Production Committee.
Naylor Jono: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9912. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONO NAYLOR (National): It is a pleasure to rise to speak to the Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill—I just wanted to make sure that I could actually say it without stumbling over the words for a start. Coming from Palmerston North I have got to say that I am very much used to the importance of trading off a good name for a geographical location. So it is something that is dear to my heart—the importance of actually being able to stand by your geographical location and being able to trade off that. However when it comes to wine I have to acknowledge that I am not as learned as Mr Faafoi or any of my colleagues on this side. In fact probably I am just one step above philistine when it comes to my knowledge of wine. But what I absolutely am committed to is this Government being absolutely 100 percent behind our exporters—100 percent behind those who are doing very well—and helping them to ensure that their success continues to grow.In 1990 as my colleague Mr Barclay said earlier the wine export industry was basically non-existent. I have brought a little graphical example—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): They have all been pulled out.JONO NAYLOR: What was that?The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): All the vines have been pulled out. The Government paid a subsidy to pull vines out.JONO NAYLOR: Oh OK. Anyway—thank you Mr Assistant Speaker; I thought I had done something wrong which is normally when you intervene but OK—in 1990 the export wine industry was practically nil and you can see a sharp increase on this graph up to 2015 when we are now at over $1.5 billion in exports.If we want our exporters to be successful—if we want them to continue to be successful—we have got to make sure that our legislation continues to support and back them. Giving them this ability to trade off their geographical location to ensure that that has some sound basis behind it so that the consumers can be confident that what they are buying is in fact what it is that they are buying is really important. No disrespect to beer making but clearly obviously it is not necessarily that important whether or not Tui is manufactured in Mangatainoka just around the corner from where I live.Kris Faafoi: It is for them.JONO NAYLOR: It is for the people of Mangatainoka clearly but not necessarily for the consumers.I think I have said enough. There has been a good-humoured debate obviously going on with this bill. But what this bill is going to do I hope is continue to allow this graph to grow at the exponential rate that it already has over the last 25 years. I look forward to seeing even greater wine exports from our country with the aid of this legislation.
Mallard Trevor: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9911. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The member’s time has concluded.
Kuriger Barbara: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKuriger Barbara: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9906. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): That effort by the Hon Clayton Cosgrove is going to be a little hard to follow because being one who favours drinking beer myself I do not know the names of the wines quite as closely as he does. But I would actually like to just make mention of Vilagrad Winery which is in Ōhaupō in my electorate which had a fire in the last 12 months and has literally risen from the ashes rebuilt itself and got going again.It is a pleasure today to speak on this bill. New Zealand wines do attract a premium in the overseas market and we do need to preserve and build on this. I want to make note of the fact that for 20 consecutive years year on year the wine industry has had an increase in export value. I think that it is pretty impressive by anybody’s standards from any industry that it has been able to do that. When we talk about geographic indications in relation to wine it is important to note that we have 550000 wine tourists in this country. The definition of a wine tourist is a tourist who visits a winery; it is not a definition of how much they consume when they go there. But it is really important to notice that if we have got 550000 people coming to visit our wineries in New Zealand and they spend almost I understand $3 billion—which was a 2015 figure—then people are interested in the geographical specifics of where our wine comes from.This bill is actually replacing or updating the principal Act which was passed in 2006 but was never enacted for the reason that my colleague Stuart Smith explained before—he has been well integrated into this industry which was that negotiations never began with the EU. But at this point in time there is an additional advantage of bringing the Act into force as that will support New Zealand’s interest in launching free-trade agreement negotiations with the EU.I think it is important to note that in this legislation the geographical indication will expire after 10 years unless a renewal fee is paid and that renewal fee will pay for the ongoing maintenance of running the programme. It is also important to note that the terms “New Zealand” “South Island” and “North Island” will be protected and the registrar will have the ability to turn down any offensive names that come forward.So it is a pleasure to speak on this bill this afternoon and I commend it to the House. Thank you.
Tisch Lindsay: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9893. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Poto Williams—5 minutes.
Borrows Chester: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9892. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call Mojo Mathers—a 5-minute call.
Dowie Sarah: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9892. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): Thank you for the opportunity to take a short call in support of the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill. My colleague Mr Scott Simpson acknowledged that he is not a Cantabrian. I too am not a Cantabrian; I am a Southlander. So therefore I think it is appropriate to acknowledge that Cantabrians are still very much on the minds of Southlanders. Our sympathies went out to Cantabrians with the horror that they experienced 5-odd years ago.There is still very much an acknowledgment of what Cantabrians have had to endure and of their strength of character in surviving and living in Christchurch while the recovery has been going on and the city is being rebuilt. There certainly is a strength of character that Cantabrians exude and we acknowledge them for their persistence. But it is certainly a relief now after one of the most ambitious rebuild projects that we have undertaken in New Zealand to be moving forward into a regeneration phase. I am sure it is very much a relief for Cantabrians.This bill—as I understand it having not sat on the Local Government and Environment Committee—is a very good one that through collaboration will establish Regenerate Christchurch which is a jointly controlled Crown organisation with the Christchurch City Council. It will lead the charge in respect of regeneration in the Greater Christchurch region. I think one of the best parts of the bill is that it is returning to a local leadership model in that—well where else should ownership of the design and the planning and the moving forward of Christchurch rest but with Cantabrians themselves?I think this is a great win for Cantabrians as they look to the future as they look to rebuilding a very positive modern city that will serve them well into the future. I wish them all the very best with that. I look forward to the results.
Hague Kevin: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHague Kevin: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9876. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.KEVIN HAGUE (Green) to the Minister of Health: Will he introduce a tax on sugary drinks in light of the growing number of countries who have done so most recently the UK and the evidence that it is effective?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): The Government’s position on a sugar tax has not changed. It is not something that we are actively considering. We will continue to keep a watching brief on the emerging evidence. I think it is important to note that there is no single solution that will fix obesity. That is why we have implemented the Childhood Obesity Plan with a range of interventions across Government the private sector communities schools and families. We are now one of the very few countries in the OECD with a national childhood obesity target and a comprehensive plan to support it.Kevin Hague: Does the Minister stand by his comments on The Nation in October last year when he said that although a tax on sugary drinks would decrease their consumption it may not decrease obesity because people could drink beer instead?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I do not think he is reporting those comments verbatim but I stand by the substantive point.Kevin Hague: Why does he disagree with George Osborne the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer who said: “I am not prepared to look back at my time here in this Parliament doing this job and say to my children’s generation: ‘I’m sorry. We knew there was a problem with sugary drinks. We knew it caused disease. But we ducked the difficult decisions and we did nothing.’ ”?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Governments in different countries make decisions for a range of reasons. I am not responsible for Mr Osborne’s statements.Kevin Hague: Which side is the Government on: multinational sugar barons like Coke or Kiwi kids whose health is suffering right now because of fizzy drinks?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: That is a really silly question; I am not going to answer it.
Hudson Brett: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9873. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.BRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister of Tourism: What reports has he received about growth in the number of visitors coming to New Zealand?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Associate Minister of Tourism) on behalf of theMinister of Tourism: A record 3.2 million tourists visited New Zealand of course in 2015. In particular there has been a huge increase in the number of visitors from China with arrivals for the year ended January 2016 up by 42 percent on the year before. They are also of course spending more which is great news for us here with Chinese visitors’ spending growing even faster than arrival numbers. In 2015 they spent more than $1.6 billion while visiting New Zealand.Brett Hudson: What are we doing to attract Chinese visitors to New Zealand?Hon Damien O’Connor: Cheap airfares.Hon PAULA BENNETT: This side of the House this Government is doing a great job in actually attracting Chinese visitors and even welcoming Chinese who might want to stay here on their visas and even work in ethnic restaurants. We kind of encourage that as well—if the member wants to chirp up there. Estimates show that up to 70000 people visited during Chinese New Year this year and we need to do all we can to obviously capitalise on this. Regional tourism organisations are working with officials to get better insights on what they can do to attract Chinese visitors to their regions.Brett Hudson: What risks are there to the continued growth of Chinese tourism?Hon PAULA BENNETT: Some of the risks that we actually have in the sector are being able to ensure that we have the right staff and skilled staff working in different areas particularly in hospitality—as you can see actually by the Tourism Industry Association New Zealand which put out a press release. It said it was really concerned that any ban on overseas chefs while working in New Zealand would have a disastrous consequence for the tourism industry and the economy actually for the money that tourism is bringing in. As the quote says: “The policy position taken this week by the Labour Party leader”—Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no responsibility for that.Grant Robertson: Is it correct that yesterday’s current account figures show that despite an increase in the number of international visitors to New Zealand in the latest quarter total expenditure fell by $57 million?Hon PAULA BENNETT: No.
O'Connor Damien: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Damien: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9873. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour—West Coast - Tasman) to the Minister for Primary Industries: Does he have confidence in his Associate Minister for Primary Industries?Hon JO GOODHEW (Associate Minister for Primary Industries) on behalf of theMinister for Primary Industries: It is still yes.Hon Damien O’Connor: Has the Associate Minister raised with the Minister any concerns about the 6000 jobs lost across the forestry sector at the same time that the harvested volume of logs has increased by 50 percent?Hon JO GOODHEW: As when the Minister was the Associate Minister and also the Minister with responsibility for forestry this is an ongoing issue for the forestry sector. So Minister Goodhew and the Minister have actually discussed this. However what we do know is that there are more logs being processed in New Zealand than ever before. That is of higher value than logs going out. The other thing that this Government is doing is certainly assisting and supporting the log processing sector so that there is a higher value coming back to New Zealand’s workers.Stuart Nash: What has his Associate Minister proposed to remedy the problem in Gisborne where Malaysian-owned Hikurangi Forest Farms refuses to guarantee logs to a locally owned saw mill preferring rather to export them even though the mill owners are prepared to pay export-equivalent log prices?Hon JO GOODHEW: It will come as no surprise to this side of the House at least that this Government is not going to get itself in the middle of a commercial arrangement. We will not require any owner who is harvesting logs to supply at any particular cost to any processor.Richard Prosser: Can the Minister confirm to the House that logs exported from New Zealand ports by vertically integrated foreign-owned forestry companies that own cutting rights to New Zealand in saw mills overseas actually earn New Zealand anything in terms of direct net foreign exchange?Hon JO GOODHEW: Yes.Stuart Nash: Has she expressed any concern at all that Hikurangi Forest Farms may lose its internationally recognised International Forest Stewardship Council certification because of its refusal to guarantee the supply of logs to a local saw mill; if not why not?Hon JO GOODHEW: Minister Goodhew has not raised that with the Minister.
Kuriger Barbara: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKuriger Barbara: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9872. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country) to the Minister of Health: By what percentage has Vote Health increased since 2008?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): I am pleased to confirm that despite tight global financial times since 2008 National has increased spending on Vote Health by over 30 percent. This $4 billion increase has supported the expansion of health services such as free under-13s GP visits over 5500 more doctors and nurses and 50000 surgeries but it has also seen a huge investment in capital projects such as nearly $1 billion on Canterbury’s health infrastructure and the upcoming hospital rebuilds on the West Coast and in Dunedin. Only National can both manage the books and increase access to health services.Barbara Kuriger: Can the Minister confirm that under this Government the average share of the economy invested in Vote Health is 6.5 percent and how does this compare historically?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The share of the economy invested in health is probably the most widely accepted measure of the priority that the Government of the day places on health. I can confirm that the average share of the economy invested in health under National is 6.5 percent and this is much higher than the average 5.7 percent invested in health by Labour from 2000 to 2008.
Smith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Stuart: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9871. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister of Education: What reports has she received on the Intensive Wraparound Service?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. The Intensive Wraparound Service is a personalised service that supports children and young people with high and complex behavioural and learning needs. I recently received the results of a review of this service conducted by the New Zealand Council for Educational Research. The review found that it is improving behaviour and educational outcomes for some of the highest-need children and young people who receive this service. Additionally families involved in the study saw the Intensive Wraparound Service as a major improvement for their children. Indeed one family described it as a “lifesaver”. Introduced in 2012 this service gives parents the choice of a locally based wraparound service within their local community and children and young people the support they need to attend their local school.Stuart Smith: What other action is she taking to ensure that students with the highest needs are supported in our education system?Hon HEKIA PARATA: Positive Behaviour for Learning is another highly successful programme. This programme has 10 initiatives to help parents whānau teachers early childhood centres and schools to address problem behaviour improve children’s well-being and increase educational achievement. Schools involved with Positive Behaviour for Learning have reported a dramatic drop in suspensions and resulting exclusions and an increase in student achievement. Teachers report that it has contributed to a more respectful and inclusive school culture improved approaches to addressing behaviour incidents improved school safety and a decrease in behaviour referrals for major incidents. I congratulate families schools and communities on their hard work in making the Intensive Wraparound Service and the Positive Behaviour for Learning initiatives a success.
Carter David: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Business Statement[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9867. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member.
Hipkins Chris: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Business Statement[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9867. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): Mr Speaker can I just on behalf of the Opposition and in keeping with the statement you made at the beginning of question time today add our thanks to Brent Smith for his 13 years of service to the House. I am told that in that time he has taken only 1½ days of sick leave. So I hope that his successor will have a similar level of dedication and commitment to this House.
Brownlee Gerry: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Business Statement[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9867. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I am not applying for the job by the way. When the House resumes on Tuesday 29 March the Government will look to make progress on the New Zealand Business Number Bill and first readings of the New Zealand Horticultural Export Authority Amendment Bill and the Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill and also progress on the Committee stages on the Order Paper.
Carter David: Retirements — Serjeant-at-Arms—Brent SmithText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Retirements — Serjeant-at-Arms—Brent Smith[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9867. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members most members will be aware that our Serjeant-at-Arms retires tomorrow after 13 years in the role. I am sure that members would join with me in thanking Brent Smith for his service and in wishing him all the best for a well-earned retirement. [Applause]
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9867. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Business StatementHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I am not applying for the job by the way. When the House resumes on Tuesday 29 March the Government will look to make progress on the New Zealand Business Number Bill and first readings of the New Zealand Horticultural Export Authority Amendment Bill and the Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill and also progress on the Committee stages on the Order Paper.CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): Mr Speaker can I just on behalf of the Opposition and in keeping with the statement you made at the beginning of question time today add our thanks to Brent Smith for his 13 years of service to the House. I am told that in that time he has taken only 1½ days of sick leave. So I hope that his successor will have a similar level of dedication and commitment to this House.Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member.
Retirements — Serjeant-at-Arms—Brent SmithText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRetirements — Serjeant-at-Arms—Brent Smith[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9867. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 17 March 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.RetirementsSerjeant-at-Arms—Brent SmithMr SPEAKER: Honourable members most members will be aware that our Serjeant-at-Arms retires tomorrow after 13 years in the role. I am sure that members would join with me in thanking Brent Smith for his service and in wishing him all the best for a well-earned retirement. [Applause]
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9865. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a second time.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 12New Zealand First 12.Bill read a second time.
Vote: Environmental Protection Authority (Protection of Environment) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Environmental Protection Authority (Protection of Environment) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9856. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Environmental Protection Authority (Protection of Environment) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 59New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; United Future 1.Noes 62New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1.Motion not agreed to.
Borrows Chester: Wellington Town Belt Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Wellington Town Belt Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9842. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call Rino Tirikatene—a 5-minute call on behalf of the Labour Party.
Borrows Chester: Wellington Town Belt Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Wellington Town Belt Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Jan Logie—a 5-minute call on behalf of the Green Party.