edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Clause 1 agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 511 in the name of the Hon Stuart Nash to clause 2 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 456 in the name of David Seymour to clause 2 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Noes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 458 in the name of David Seymour to clause 2 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 1ACT New Zealand 1.Noes 119New Zealand National 55; New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8; Ross.Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That clause 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Clause 2 as amended agreed to.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Arms Legislation Bill with amendment.Report adopted.
Arms Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 2
VotePart 2 Amendments to other enactmentsA party vote was called for on the question That Part 2 be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Part 2 agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 511 in the name of the Hon Stuart Nash to Schedule 1 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 64New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8; Ross.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.Amendments agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): David Seymour's amendment to Schedule 1 set out on Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 456 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee. David Seymour's amendment to Schedule 1 set out on SOP 457 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.A party vote was called for on the question That Schedule 1 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 511 in the name of the Hon Stuart Nash to Schedule 2 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Amendments agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): David Seymour's amendment to Schedule 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 457 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee. A party vote was called for on the question That Schedule 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand; Ross.Schedule 2 as amended agreed to.
Arms Legislation Bill — In Committee—Part 1
Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
Sio Hon Aupito William; Mallard TrevorHon Aupito WILLIAM SIO (Associate Minister of Justice): I strongly commend this bill to the House because I believe that all citizens have the right to vote if they meet minimum standards and if they so choose. SPEAKER: The question is—Hon Nathan Guy: Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: —that the—Hon Nathan Guy: Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: Oh the Hon Nathan Guy.
Craig LizDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to take a brief call in support of this bill. It's a really important bill and I commend it to the House.
SpeechMARK PATTERSON (NZ First): Thank you Mr Speaker. New Zealand First rises to support this bill and in doing so to acknowledge the 2578 submissions that went before the select committee 86 of which gave oral evidence 78 percent of which—or 2000—expressed strong support for this bill. Five hundred of those submitters acknowledged that it was a bill that upholds human rights and over 400 submitters said that allowing prisoners to vote would have a rehabilitative effect. I think it's worth reflecting on this because this is the core of this bill. Former National Prime Minister Bill English described prison as a moral and fiscal failure and one of the efforts that the Minister of Corrections Kelvin Davis has been putting in within this term of Parliament is to up the rehabilitation rates and help to transition prisoners back into society because while there is a punitive element to it—and there needs to be actually—we need these people to be coming out of prison ready to re-engage in civil society and this bill by re-enfranchising them and giving them a connection to the democratic process is part of that effort. I would like to reflect that this bill merely returns us to the former status quo as was passed under the Bolger Government of 1993 in the 1993 Act. The status quo that we have now is only in place because of a member's bill by Paul Quinn in 2010. If the members opposite in the former Government had been so convinced that this was a huge priority for them they would have put that through as a Government bill but they did not. So the catastrophising that I'm hearing from the other side is completely overblown. I would acknowledge that this bill has had some very high-level support through the select committee process. The Law Society has advocated on behalf of this bill. In fact to quote the Law Society The Law Society generally supports the Bill having opposed the restriction imposed by the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Act 2010 … that disqualified all prisoners from voting. The 2010 Act was subsequently … the subject of the first 'declaration of inconsistency' [with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act …] made by a New Zealand court." So the courts the Law Society and even the Auditor-General of the day when the 2010 member's bill was passed spoke against this bill saying it was a breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. So New Zealand First supports this bill on the basis that it assists transitioning prisoners back into civil society and a more decent society. Thank you Mr Speaker."
Whaitiri MekaHon MEKA WHAITIRI (Labour—Ikaroa-Rāwhiti): E Te Māngai o Te Whare tēnā koe. Otirā e ngā mema katoa o Te Whare nei tēnā tātou katoa. I'm pleased to take a call on the Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill and can I first start by thanking the 2580 submitters—2580 submitters—made up of individuals and organisations who submitted on this bill. The Justice Committee of which I am the chair spent 18½ hours in hearing oral evidence—Hon Dr Nick Smith: During the lockdown—during the lockdown. Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: —so I do want to commend the clerks of the House in that we heard 18½ hours from submitters on this piece of legislation—and yes we weren't the only select committee hearing during lockdown—but I want to commend those submitters that took the time. I want to commend the clerks and the advisers and I also want to commend the committee members who at the time of COVID were facing a lot of challenges in their electoral offices. I'm not doubting that and the previous speaker has raised that but we turn our minds to this particular bill. To remind the House the bill is essentially three clauses—clauses 5 7 and 8—and we will scrutinise that during the committee stage. But essentially clause 5 is around disqualifying who this bill doesn't cover. So it doesn't cover those in life imprisonment it does not cover those in preventive detention and it doesn't cover those serving terms of three years or more. Clause 7 ensures that the prison officers work with eligible prisoners before they are released so that they are enrolled to vote and of course clause 8 which the former speaker just mentioned is around the unpublished rolls. I heard the Minister of Justice say in this House that in terms of that particular clause he is bringing in a Supplementary Order Paper. We as a committee talked and debated that particular clause very closely. The advice was given to the officials. Labour members of this committee agreed to those changes and the National members did not but the bill that the Minister presents here is a reflection of those thousands of submitters and those hours of oral evidence presented to this House. Without further ado I am pleased to recommend the Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill to the House.
SpeechBRETT HUDSON (National): Thank you Madam Chair. I was moved to speak again on this title and commencement partly because of your notification of Speaker's ruling 111/4 but also Mr Seymour's contribution on the name of the bill and actually just on something that Mr McKelvie raised.But I just make the point first on—Mr Seymour mentioned leaks around registry and steal-to-order lists. Well he did forget to mention the police SAP fault which led to licence holders being able to see all sorts of information about other licence holders including the details of those prohibited firearms that they weren't supposed to have. So it's already happened actually Mr Seymour.Mr McKelvie's point about firearms not making it on to the register: well the Government chose a certain buy-back scheme which they were warned would have lower compliance and as a result there are up to 180000 prohibited firearms still in circulation. Now they're held unlawfully and that's bad but they're there and they will never ever ever go on to a registry which makes that intensely intensely flawed indeed.But the main point I wanted to stand and talk about was—Mr Seymour raised the issue about firearms ownership being a privilege in the purpose statement of the bill. It is true that in the purpose statement the Government has attempted at least to say that the ownership of firearms is a privilege. But I am pleased to say and I've been waiting some time for this moment to say it for firearms owners around the country that the good work in the Firearms and Expenditure Committee has fundamentally changed that to the effect that it needed to and that is in the issue of a firearms licence clause 35. It's to do with section 24 of the principal Act Subject to subsection (2) a firearms licence must be issued by a member of the Police to an applicant if the member of the Police is satisfied that—" and its fit and proper person criteria. It is the same fundamental criteria—a couple of tweaks—that has applied since 1993. It's a restrained right but it's still a right. So firearms owners that have long held that as long as they are fit and proper people they have a right to have a firearms licence—well they do and this bill ensures that they do. So my message to them is: ignore the purpose statement. It's not the principal place of interpretation for the bill; the actual clauses are. Look in the "Issue of firearms licence" look in what will be section 24 but it's clause 35 of the Arms Legislation Bill. If you're a fit and proper person they must give you a licence. It is a restrained right but it is a right you have for being a good and proper person."
Nash StuartHon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): Thank you very much Mr Chair. David Seymour gave another five-minute speech. I don't think there were any questions there relevant to the bill; so I've got nothing to say—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! It's the Chair that makes that determination not the Minister in the chair.Hon STUART NASH: OK. No questions worth answering there. Mr Hudson I did talk about your Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) last night and what I will do is I will reiterate the points I made last night. But the other thing I would say is I used the example that in fact there are no sports in the Commonwealth Games or the Olympic Games that use banned firearms. I did not say that if they are not part of the Olympic Games or the Commonwealth Games they are not a sport. I just used the example.Now one thing I would say is keep in mind the purpose of this legislation and the purpose of the bill beforehand is to ensure that we remove these firearms from our communities. It's why we voted; it's why Mr Hudson you voted; it's why your party voted to remove these firearms from our communities. Now as we know every single exemption we put in place—it would put one in place with regards to pest control—just chips away a little bit at that; it just opens up the door.Now we turn to pest control. I've talked about your SOP on that a couple of times as well. We have said that if in fact there is a bona fide reason for a farmer to have to use these weapons for pest control we'll give them the exemption. Now in terms of the sport shooting SOP there are numerous international competitions and events that use these prohibited firearms as the member has alluded to himself. We estimate that even if we have an exemption just limited to three-gun let alone all the other competitions there would be around about 2000 exemptions. So what Mr Hudson's SOP recommends is that we open this exemption up to every bona fide international competition—Brett Hudson: All of them are pistol-holder licences.Hon STUART NASH: No that's not true Mr Hudson. Brett Hudson: They have to be to compete in three-gun Minister. One of the guns is a pistol. They have to hold a pistol endorsement.Hon STUART NASH: No we're talking about your SOP Mr Hudson which talks about opening this up to every single bona fide international competition. What that does is it opens the door to anyone who wants their AR-15 their AK-47 or the other banned firearms back so they can compete. The aim of this legislation I must say is to remove these dangerous firearms from our communities and Mr Hudson the SOP 450 would open not a crack in the door but a massive gap to allow a whole lot of people through because if we said that any bona fide international competition that used these banned firearms would get an exemption we would see thousands of applications for people to have licences for banned firearms and that goes against what we are trying to achieve in this bill. In fact I believe it would fundamentally erode the basic principle behind this bill. So just to clarify once again Mr Hudson I will not support your SOP 450 for the reasons that I've outlined.
Nash StuartHon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): I'm not going to answer those questions again because I think I've answered them about four times but I will just make one correction to the member Hamish Walker. The man who makes the allegations is not a police officer; he's a former police officer and has been a former police officer for quite a long time. But yet again we get another five-minute speech that doesn't mention anything in the bill.Jami-Lee Ross talked about health practitioners. We actually believe—this goes also to Mr Seymour's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 458 and Mr Hudson's SOP on this as well. What we do believe is that currently Police is not maximising the opportunity to draw on the knowledge of health practitioners to enable early identification in the consequential management to the risk of self-harm of death by firearm. I had a meeting with Rural Women New Zealand and they talked about the fact that one of the greatest fears they have is when their man disappears to the back of the farm in tough times and doesn't return. Now what we're doing here is we're not obliging health practitioners we're not saying they must contact police whenever they have concerns; it says they should consider contacting police. In fact as I think Mr Hudson alluded to in his second reading speech what we're putting in place at the moment is actually no more than is in law anyway. What we want to do and what we're asking the police to do Mr Ross is actually notify the health practitioner that their patient does have firearms.But this isn't about relitigating anyone's past and looking at a mental health episode that might have happened 20 30 40 years ago and saying you're not fit and proper. This is actually using what we believe is information to determine if someone is fit and proper but it is not a way to say that someone cannot have a licence. It's about managing the licence process. When the original bill was submitted to the House it was tougher. The Privacy Commissioner had a look at this and he made some strong recommendations which I do believe were picked up by the select committee; so I think where we've landed on this is actually the right place. The reason I say that is because most suicides by firearm are rarely preceded by attendance at a mental health service or a hospital for self-harm. For a person who is undergoing a mental health episode at that point in time firearms make is of significant concern. So what we're saying is the doctor should consider contacting police under certain circumstances—that's all.
Nash StuartHon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): Yet again we've been debating this bill now for over an hour and yet again we have heard another speech which was about a 10-minute speech on something that has absolutely no relevance to the legislation before us. I would also say that when that member asks what have I done to deal with the issues Mr Nick Smith we are here debating the solution to what the issues were. I will answer Mr Smith's question yet again but for the very last time. Mr Smith has been a member of this House for a long time. Mr Smith is also very aware that there is a royal commission at the moment that is looking at how that terrorist obtained a gun a licence and his ammunition. Mr Smith is also very aware that as a Minister and as a member of Parliament first of all I have no access to what the royal commission is deliberating. They have not put out a draft report they have not put out a report they have not released anything. It is not the place for a Minister of the Crown to second-guess what the royal commission is going to come out with because I do not know. It is the royal commission that is looking at the answers to your questions Mr Smith. Now one thing that I would request members to do is—we've got about another half an hour on this section; can we at least—after an hour and a half of general third reading speeches it would be good to talk about stuff in this bill or is it the fact that you agree with the bill to the point where you've got no contention and therefore you don't want to talk about the bill? Mr Smith asks what is the solution to the issue we've found ourselves in. The solution to the issue we've found is this piece of legislation Mr Smith and let's debate this legislation going forward. That is my request. Thank you very much.
Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): I want to focus on Part 1 of this bill and the failure of the Minister to be upfront with New Zealanders about the background of this bill and the awful tragedy that occurred in Christchurch on 15 March last year. I was gobsmacked to read this week that the licensing of the madman who killed 51 people on 15 March did so and received a firearms licence against the law of the day. Now for this bill that we've debated and the previous bills that we have promoted this Parliament had a right to know what went wrong with that man getting a gun licence.So my first question to the Minister: when did he know that police failed the old law in vetting the issue of the gun licence for that individual? I am at loss as to how a man applies for a firearms licence in Dunedin the law requires that a close associate or family member vet for him and someone at the other end of the country in the Waikato who's only met him on the internet provides that verification. We're not talking about a failure of the law; we're talking about the failure to do the basics right and that is what is at the core of that tragedy. So my first question to the Minister: when did he know? Simple question Minister.Hon Stuart Nash: I'll answer it then now. Sit down I'll answer it.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I'm happy to yield.
SpeechTUESDAY 16 JUNE 2020(continued on Wednesday 17 June 2020)ARMS LEGISLATION BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed.Part 1 Amendments to Arms Act 1983 (continued)BRETT HUDSON (National): When we concluded last night or paused last night I was referring to comments the Minister had said about potentially the National Rifle Association coming over and setting up all these sports clubs and ranges and I pointed out that in my Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) it says that the said club or range has to be certified by the Commissioner of Police. So I have a series of questions about these SOPs.
Thursday 18 June 2020 - Volume 746
Land Transport (Rail) Legislation Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Land Transport (Rail) Legislation Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 50New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a second time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 50New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a second time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Arms Legislation Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 50New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Bill read a third time.
Arms Legislation Bill — Third Reading
11. Question No. 11—PoliceBRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister of PoliceQuestion No. 11—Police11. BRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister of Police: What police resources if any have been deployed to respond to incidents of people leaving COVID-19 quarantine or managed isolation facilities on compassionate grounds or prior to a COVID-19 test being returned?Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): Police are one of a number of enforcement agencies that may be required to respond across Government to incidents in relation to persons leaving a managed isolation facility on compassionate grounds prior to a COVID-19 test being returned. In this narrow example I am advised that it is the Ministry of Health that will instruct police to assist them. Police will then make a decision about what steps they need to take to locate the person and facilitate their return. Decisions about police deployment are the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police delegated to district commanders but typically police resources include managed isolation facility reassurance officers district general duty front-line officers iwi liaison and family liaison officers police intelligence-gathering staff and inter-district operations to coordinate regional responses when required.Brett Hudson: Did police respond to an incident where a person had been released from a Corrections facility and tested positive to COVID-19 and if so how much time passed between police being notified and the person being located?Hon STUART NASH: Well that is a very specific question. If the member had put that down in the primary I might have come with that information. One thing I would say is it probably comes as no surprise that I do not receive nor seek a briefing on every police call-out of which there are approximately 3250 per day.Brett Hudson: Does he think there were adequate conditions in place for the reported cases of people leaving isolation to attend a Mongrel Mob tangi in Hamilton who subsequently needed to be tracked down by police?SPEAKER: No he's not responsible.Brett Hudson: OK. How many incidents that police have responded to at the behest of the Ministry of Health regarding locating close contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases have police successfully located?Hon STUART NASH: They've successfully located all of them.
10. Question No. 10—Trade and Export GrowthJAMIE STRANGE (Labour) to the Minister for Trade and Export GrowthQuestion No. 10—Trade and Export Growth10. JAMIE STRANGE (Labour) to the Minister for Trade and Export Growth: What actions has the Government taken to increase trade with the United Kingdom and other countries?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for Trade and Export Growth): New Zealand and the United Kingdom share a particularly close bond. We share a queen we've both got a red white and blue flag and soon we'll have closer trade links. Yesterday New Zealand became one of the first countries to begin negotiations for a free-trade agreement (FTA) with the United Kingdom following Brexit. A high-quality comprehensive and inclusive free-trade agreement with the UK will also send a vital message about the importance of free and open trade rules more broadly with other countries.Jamie Strange: What outcomes does the Government want to achieve from a trade agreement with the United Kingdom and others?Hon DAVID PARKER: What we're doing is creating opportunities for our exporters to earn more money to employ more New Zealanders and to pay higher wages. We do this by improving the diversity of the export markets that they have lower tariff access to. We also want to make it easier for companies to trade through digital channels—this is particularly important in a post-COVID environment. We want to level the playing field between New Zealand exporters and exporters from other countries some of whom have advantage compared with New Zealand—for example kiwifruit from some other countries have lower tariff rates into the European Union including the UK at the moment and we think overall this will be good. Through this agreement we'll also address environmental challenges like climate change.Jamie Strange: How will a high-quality trade agreement with the United Kingdom benefit New Zealanders?Hon DAVID PARKER: One in four New Zealanders' jobs depends on exports and we know from statistics that exporting firms lift productivity at a faster rate they employ more staff as a consequence of their export journey and they pay better wages. So it's clear that trade can help drive our post - COVID-19 economic recovery through creating jobs boosting productivity and generating growth and this New Zealand - UK FTA like the New Zealand - EU FTA will add to that journey.
7. Question No. 7—EducationJO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 7—Education7. JO LUXTON (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What responses has he seen to Apprenticeship Boost?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): I'm advised that the Apprenticeship Boost package which provides employers with $1000 per month for a first-year apprentice and $500 per month for a second-year apprentice has been received extremely positively by businesses and industry groups. The CEO of the industry training organisation Competenz Fiona Kingsford said she was delighted. The Motor Industry Training Organisation's Janet Lane said she wholeheartedly applauded the unprecedented announcement even going so far as to say the Government is showing leadership and significant goodwill to businesses taking on apprentices. While the Motor Trade Association's chief executive Craig Pomare said that it was A great outcome for everyone."Jo Luxton: What responses has he seen from businesses?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I am informed that LT McGuinness's construction manager Sean McGuinness said on Newstalk ZB that this'll help an industry facing trade shortages in recent years. He said it's going to incentivise a lot of employers to take on new trainees and futureproof tradespeople in New Zealand for the next decade. Agricultural machinery supplier Landpower's John McDonald said that the "Apprenticeship Boost along with the removal of training fees is a significant helping hand." He said "It gives [them] confidence to keep [their] current apprentices and provides [them] with a [much] greater appetite to bring on more".Jo Luxton: What reaction has he seen from farmers?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Chris Lewis from Federated Farmers acknowledged that one of the key problems facing farmers is the cost associated with taking on and training new staff particularly those who are new to the sector. He said that the apprenticeship support programme will make the transition and retention of new workers a lot easier benefiting farmers workers and the economy as we rebound from the effects of COVID-19."
4. Question No. 4—State Owned EnterprisesDARROCH BALL (NZ First) to the Minister for State Owned EnterprisesQuestion No. 4—State Owned Enterprises4. DARROCH BALL (NZ First) to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he stand by all of his actions relating to investment in KiwiRail?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Minister for State Owned Enterprises): Yes I humbly do particularly those concerning projects which promise to revitalise New Zealand regions. Last week we visited the Whangārei freight terminal with my colleague Shane Jones. We had the pleasure of meeting many of the people who work on a critical part of New Zealand's infrastructure which has been neglected and run down for far too long. It included seeing the welding of new heavy rail lines of 75 metres in length the cartage of them down to the railway lines all the way to the tunnels and also the plans to lower the tunnels between Whangārei and Auckland. That represents huge investment and a harbinger of enormous economic recovery for Northland when these things are running properly.Darroch Ball: How much in total has this Government invested in New Zealand's railways?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: $4.6 billion which includes $350 million for improvements to the Wiri to Quay Park corridor; $371 million to extend the electrification from Papakura to Pukekohe; $211 million for improvements to the Wellington Wairarapa and Palmerston North networks—but hang on there's more—$400 million for the Interislander ferry replacement; $247 million for the Drury and associated railway stations; and $6.2 million for the Napier to Wairoa railway. There's no doubt that railways has got a new sense of action and unction. Thank you.Darroch Ball: How will these investments in rail help create jobs for New Zealanders?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Thank you very much for that question because the Government's recovery plan is based on business and business and jobs jobs jobs and as part of the recent Provincial Growth Fund reset again spearheaded by my colleague Shane Jones $60 million of projects were announced specifically on worker redeployment. That includes $26 million for rail projects which will focus on maintaining existing lines which lay neglected and overgrown under the purview of the previous Government. That investment will create shovel-ready jobs for hundreds and hundreds of people. This Government is jobs-focused and that's why we're making sure that employment is a core factor of our decision making where we make our investments in New Zealand railways. The great news is that these investments will be around from 50 to 100 years' time.
1. Question No. 1—FinanceKIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of FinanceORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Finance1. KIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Today Statistics New Zealand released GDP data for the March quarter showing the initial impacts of COVID-19 on the economy as we moved early to close our borders and put public health measures in place to protect New Zealanders. The data showed GDP fell 1.6 percent in the March quarter from December within the range of economists' expectations. Annual average GDP was up 1.5 percent from a year ago. We have always acknowledged that GDP in the March and June quarters in particular will show the impacts of the public health measures to protect New Zealand from the global COVID19 pandemic. It is these measures which have allowed us to open up the economy more quickly than planned and given us a head start on our recovery compared to many other countries in the world.Kiritapu Allan: How did the global COVID-19 pandemic and public health measures affect different industries in the economy?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Our measures to protect New Zealand from the global pandemic started on 3 February when all foreign nationals travelling from or transiting through China were refused entry through our borders. Moves to close our borders on 19 March the move to level 3 on 24 March and to level 4 on 26 March all had an impact on GDP. Activity in the accommodation restaurant and bar industries declined 7.8 percent during the quarter while exports in terms of travel services declined 8.5 percent as fewer tourists entered New Zealand. We also saw the impact of the glut of European logs going into China which led to activity in the forestry and logging industry declining 5.2 percent while we also have to bear in mind that the drought at the start of the year was also having an impact in the agriculture sector which fell 0.3 percent.Kiritapu Allan: What is the outlook for the economy from here?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We know that the current June quarter will see the biggest impact on GDP of COVID-19 reflecting the alert level for measures through April as well as alert level 3. This backwards-looking data will be released in September. The Secretary to the Treasury yesterday advised the Finance and Expenditure Committee that its outlook has changed since the Budget forecast. Treasury said the move to alert level 1 sooner than expected has meant increased economic activity and said that early indications are that activity had held up better than expected in the June quarter but they warned about the global outlook deteriorating. Today Kiwibank indicated that beyond the September quarter there is a growing sense albeit small that the outlook is looking brighter. New Zealand got on top of COVID-19 much sooner than most had expected allowing the rapid reopening of the economy. Kiwibank have said they've been buoyed by the strength in the rebound of spending amongst their own customers and that New Zealand would avoid the worst-case scenarios.
Greater Christchurch Regeneration Amendment Bill — Second Reading
Craig LizDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): It's a pleasure to take a brief call on this bill because while I didn't sit on the Governance and Administration Committee I understand how important this bill is in terms of being a milestone for Christchurch's regeneration. And I think basically what this bill does is pave the way for the transition back to local decision-making by local leadership and local institutions which is incredibly important for Christchurch moving forward. So I commend this bill to the House.Bill read a second time.
Andersen GinnyGINNY ANDERSEN (Labour): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. It was a great privilege to be on the select committee that considered the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Amendment Bill the Governance and Administration Committee and it was really good to hear all those submissions that did come through. The Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act was enacted really to try and see the progress made kept in a space where it really did. As a former head girl and student of Avonside Girls' High School and knowing so many of those from Christchurch who have had a hard time in the last decade it's really good to see such progress going forward and I look forward to seeing the excellent work in rebuilding a city where I have a lot of strong feelings and good memories. I look forward to seeing that continue and it's great to see this legislation pass another milestone. I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechJOANNE HAYES (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a privilege to stand and speak on the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Amendment Bill in its second reading. I want to say that I have just left the Christchurch East electorate to move up north but in my time since arriving there in 2014 and right up to the start of this year I have felt a lot of warmth there. I didn't know what I was going to but the Christchurch East people made me feel at home and part of their family so I just wanted to acknowledge them. Pertaining to the bill I want to acknowledge the Hon Gerry Brownlee and Nicky Wagner for the work that they did directly after the earthquake. It was a huge job and I think that they've done an amazing amount of work to actually get it to where the Hon Megan Woods is able to pick and carry on and carry through with the next stage of the regeneration project. You know National always felt that it was dealing with an unwilling partner in the Christchurch City Council but the people have spoken and as my colleagues on this side and across the House have actually talked about it was about repealing section 71 so that the power could end up going back into the hands of the local people so that they can do the projects that they wanted to do. In saying that there were a couple of projects already in line with that: the cranberry—not the cranberry"—the Cranford Basin which I'm really pleased to see that the Christchurch City Council is picking up as a project as well as looking after it and the other one we've heard about is the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor regeneration plan as part of the red zone. I think that I also need to mention here the investment of the taxpayers of New Zealand in the regeneration project with the $300 million of taxpayers' money available for the regeneration projects of Christchurch. That kind of brings the whole of New Zealand into Christchurch in supporting them to grow and regenerate into actually what's going to be a bigger and better city than it was pre-earthquakes. So I think that the council have done an amazing job in being able to work alongside of Regenerate Christchurch Development Christchurch Ltd and other organisations to grow their city. Finally I just want to acknowledge the developments in New Brighton. They weren't regeneration projects but I tell you what the work that was done there on the children's playground and the hot saltwater pools has regenerated the—Hon Member: Don't mention the playground. JOANNE HAYES: —ha ha!—spirits of New Brighton. It has regenerated the heart and the soul and the spirit of those that live in the New Brighton area. That's why it is my pleasure and privilege to commend this bill to the House. Thank you very much."
O'Connor GregGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu): I asked for the opportunity to speak on this bill because like Ron Mark before me and Andrew Falloon while not a Christchurch MP I did live there and it sounds like we have to name to prove it the suburbs we lived in—Merivale in my case Mr Falloon.But seriously I also was privileged to spend three weeks in Christchurch—I was in Christchurch within 18 hours of that earthquake. I spent most of that time in the red zone when the real trauma and the understanding of the depth of just what the earthquake had done to Christchurch and Canterbury was being realised and on behalf of Cantabrians I don't think the rest of New Zealand still realises just the depth of change the depth of angst that still remains in Canterbury and I think this bill will be just another one of those small things that Cantabrians go through yet another chapter in rebuilding.I can't help thinking that all New Zealanders now will remember COVID; this is a time in their lives that changed much. They'll go back to this moment. Cantabrians I think for a generation—and perhaps more—will always think of that morning that this occurred and now they are able to be part of this legislation going through. I think anyone that has ever spent any time in Christchurch will know they are a parochial bunch; they've got a lot to be parochial about. I was just saying that for the people of Kaiapoi to be parochial in Canterbury must be pretty parochial to be overtaking the general population down there.But appreciating that this is recognition that Christchurch is getting back on its feet there's a long way to go and it gives me great pleasure to commend this bill to the House.
SpeechHon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): Thank you Madam Speaker. Well I will only take a short call on behalf of New Zealand First firstly to congratulate the Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration on the sterling work she's done and also to recognise the Christchurch-based MPs from across the House who have put in so much effort so much work and their support in behind this legislation. I have lived in Canterbury as you know Madam Speaker on and off for about 30-odd years and I lived in many suburbs out at Burnham at Rolleston before it became a mini-city as it is now I think unfortunately in many ways thanks to—you hate to say it like that—the Christchurch earthquakes. Having a son in the police down there who's been a long-serving member and many family members down there who deployed in response to the Christchurch earthquakes—a son-in-law who I'm very proud of who won New Zealand's highest valour award the Fire Service has got to give for his actions in the Christchurch earthquake and that's Scott Shadbolt—and seeing Christchurch come through what have been very very challenging times I don't think I'll ever lose the love for Christchurch. It was my home for many many years. And as Madam Speaker you know I stood for Parliament many many times there and had an electorate office down there—out of Parliament office I should call it. And I've gotten to know quite a number of the members of Parliament who held those seats down there and I recognise Clayton Cosgrove who did good work down there and Gerry Brownlee. We're political adversaries on occasions and we're political allies on occasions but I have to say that Gerry was left with a very difficult task over those times.Christchurch has come through and Christchurch is at that stage now where it needs to transition again and this bill supports the return of the leadership in Christchurch's regeneration following those devastating earthquakes to local organisations and local leadership and that is a very welcome thing. I know that members across the House—Matt Doocey who's the MP for Waimakariri my daughter's member of Parliament has likewise been a strong supporter and political representative down there alongside you yourself Madam Speaker and everybody else. It's been challenging times. The transition that we're now making through this legislation is I know very welcome down there. The work and the effort of all of the members of Parliament and the Ministers both present and former in the last Government should be recognised. I commend the bill to the House.
SpeechDr JIAN YANG (National): I rise to speak briefly on the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Amendment Bill in its second reading. Now it has been almost a decade since we had the Canterbury earthquakes in 2010 and 2011. I have visited Christchurch a number of times and initially I saw devastation and vacant land and later on I saw more development when again I attended events in Christchurch. So we can see the development but on the other hand there was much damage because of the earthquakes. Initially we responded with some immediate measures such as for the safety issue and the livelihood issue but later on we needed a longer and longer plan and for that reason we needed to some legislation or extraordinary measures and that was why they had the particular bill or the particular Act—the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act—in 2016. So that Act was there for some extraordinary measures to fast track the rebuild of Christchurch and the Canterbury region and it worked to some extent. It was supposed to have central government and local government consultations speeding up and it did achieve some results. At the same time we did see that it was necessary now to transfer the power back to local government and this bill itself is trying to basically speed up the process. We think it is time to speed up the process to make sure that we have certainty so that local government knows what to do and how it should happen. Also the bill itself will give sufficient time to complete the required title configuration work in the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor before its transfer to the council. Now the Governance and Administration Committee itself has worked quite I would say constructively in the process. We heard submissions from the officials and from other people and then there was COVID-19 so we stopped for a while. But as soon as we came to the level 3 lockdown we actually started working again. So we had a meeting just a couple of days after we entered into level 3 lockdown and we made some suggestions. Here I would like to thank our members from both National and Labour and also in particular I want to thank the Hon Gerry Brownlee for his contribution and also the Hon Nicky Wagner for her contribution to this particular bill. As I said we worked constructively. We support the bill and the committee in the end made a couple of major amendments. Previous speakers have mentioned those amendments but mostly I would say that with the clarification of the area covered by the bill—that is the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor area—we have made it very clear. As a matter of fact the officials provided a map so that we could see very clearly what the area covers. So it's very very detailed work. We also have included the transitional provision for section 71 powers and the plan process. Basically we've made it very clear that we would like to improve the bill to make it clearer for the transitional process and also for the area that the bill itself covers. So I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.
Williams PotoHon POTO WILLIAMS (Associate Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration): Thank you Madam Speaker and I'm especially pleased that you are in the Chair to hear another part of the passage of the journey of this particular bill. I have a short contribution to make because I think that the Minister and the previous speaker who's just resumed her seat Nicky Wagner have articulated what we're here about to do today. But I do want to make a couple of points. The first point I want to make is I want to say a word of thanks to Dr Thérèse Arseneau and her board and Ivan Iafeta and the staff and the team at Regenerate Christchurch for whom this piece of legislation actually ends that organisation. I know that they have handled the transition extraordinarily well and I want to thank them for their work and to also acknowledge that the work that they have done will always always be within the fabric of Christchurch. It's important that we acknowledge that this piece of legislation now allows for Christchurch to fully embrace its own regeneration that the Crown now steps back from that piece of work and acknowledges the passage of time and the importance of Christchurch now determining its own future. I'm extraordinarily proud of that. I want to thank the select committee and the chair Dr Jian Yang for ensuring that this piece of work was completed in an expeditious way and returned to the House. I also want to commend them for a couple of significant pieces of work that they did—recognising that the section 71 transitional provisions needed to be inserted as an amendment to this piece of work—and I thank them for that. I also want to thank them for ensuring that when the land title reconfiguration work happened we included a very clear definition of the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor and I thank them for that as well. So just to end this is another step in the journey and we will soon be putting the final stamp on returning Christchurch's leadership for its own regeneration back into its own hands. I'd like to commend the bill to the House.