edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
5. Question No. 5—HealthDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 5—Health5. Dr LIZ CRAIG (Labour) to the Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made about mental health facilities?Hon JENNY SALESA (Associate Minister of Health) on behalf of the Minister of Health: On behalf of the Minister of Health earlier today the Prime Minister and the Minister of Health visited MidCentral DHB to announce that funding has been approved to redevelop an acute mental health facility at Palmerston North Hospital. Our mental health services are staffed by dedicated and compassionate professionals who work hard to support people in distress. However all too often their jobs are made harder because of the rundown state of the facilities that they work in. This Government is committed to upgrading our mental health and addiction facilities which have been neglected for far too long. We've set aside $30 million to upgrade the facility at Palmerston North Hospital which is the third mental health facility upgrade to be announced since Budget 2019.Dr Liz Craig: So how will the upgrade benefit the people who use mental health services at Palmerston North Hospital?Hon JENNY SALESA: The current facility at Palmerston North Hospital was opened almost 20 years ago. The way we care for people has come a long way since then and we need facilities that reflect modern best practice. The upgraded facility will address the existing lack of space and privacy that compromises the safety and security of staff and patients. It will create a far more supportive environment which will better support people to return home sooner. There will be more shared spaces for family members an increase in the number of beds and flexibility for further growth in the future.Dr Liz Craig: So how does today's announcement fit into the Government's wider plans for hospital and mental health facilities?Hon JENNY SALESA: Funding for this project comes from the $1.7 billion invested in Budget 2019 for upgrading and building new hospital and health facilities across the country. Just last month we announced funding for a new mental health facility in Waikato and in June funding was set aside for a mental health and addiction facility in Tai Rāwhiti. Outside of mental health we've also announced a major redevelopment at Taranaki Base Hospital a new elective surgery unit in North Shore several projects at Counties Manukau and are pushing ahead with a project to rebuild Dunedin Hospital. Of course there is much more work to be done but after nine years of under-investment we're getting on with the job of rebuilding and renewing our hospitals.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Will the Minister commit to the rebuild of the mental health facilities at Wakari Hospital in Dunedin given that its age is over 62 years?Hon JENNY SALESA: The member will just have to wait patiently for further announcements in the future. The member when he was the Minister of Health sure took a long time to actually make that announcement himself.
2. Question No. 2—EducationMARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 2—Education2. MARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What legislative change will be undertaken as part of the reform of the Tomorrow's Schools system?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): A number of the reforms will involve legislative change and we will be legislating through a new education and training bill to for example establish minimum eligibility criteria for school principals to take a network-based approach to the management of school enrolment zones to require boards of trustees to undertake consultation when they are making school rules and to introduce a mandatory code of conduct for school boards. Marja Lubeck: How will this legislative change make the education system more child-centred? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The legislative change will among other things establish independent local complaint and dispute resolution panels that will help students and their whānau who have not been able to resolve complaints and disputes with the school. It will also clarify the responsibilities of boards of trustees in relation to relevant students' rights and it will strengthen the provisions that give children and young people rights to education—in particular by clarifying that the right to education includes the right for enrolled students to attend the school at which they're enrolled for all of the hours that the school is open for instruction. Marja Lubeck: What other changes can we expect to see in this education and training bill? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: It will be quite a significant bill. It repeals and replaces the Education Act of 1989 and the Education Act of 1964 and it carries forward the decision made in the bill currently before the select committee to also include the Industry Training Act and the primary education legislation. It does make some further policy changes including protecting the credibility of our national qualification the National Certificate of Educational Achievement by preventing the awarding of it offshore except in exceptional circumstances; updating some of the provisions around special schools which will be renamed as specialist schools; removing the ability of a State school principal to stop a student from attending school because the principal has grounds to believe that the student is not clean enough; and enabling the Teaching Council more flexibility in renewal of teachers' practising certificates where the applicant has either recent teaching experience and/or professional learning development.
McAnulty Kieran; Dyson RuthKIERAN McANULTY (Labour): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. I can tell the House with utmost honesty I had no expectation to be standing up and speaking on this bill at this very moment but I was—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): I'm sorry to interrupt the member.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 6 p.m.
Strange JamieJAMIE STRANGE (Labour): Madam Speaker thank you for the opportunity to follow the esteemed member from Northland there Matt King on his eloquent presentation this afternoon. I'd also like to acknowledge the class of 2017". There's quite a large number of the "class of 2017" in the House so well done. This bill as we've heard in the previous two readings is about fairness and balance. We've heard for many years that the people in the wheel clamping industry have been charging exorbitant prices often up to $500 $600 or $700 to have the clamp removed from the car.Kieran McAnulty: That much? JAMIE STRANGE: That much Mr McAnulty. It is a disgrace and as a Government we've been hearing this and we've listened to the people and we're taking some action. So we're delivering on wheel clamping and the way we're delivering on this is by making it fair and by putting some regulation around there to protect the consumer. As Mr King mentioned we've settled on a $100 maximum fee for wheel clamping. So gone are the days of the $500 fees that wheel clampers were charging at times. We've put fairness into the industry through regulation. We're requiring a wheel clamp operator to respond to a motorist and remove a clamp in a reasonable period. So when the clamp is on there—Simeon Brown: How does a clamp come off? Matt King: When is a clamp is a clamp is a clamp? JAMIE STRANGE: —and the clamp is to be removed—we're clamping down. We're clamping down folks. There we go we're clamping down on those who have been abusing the system and exploiting everyday hard-working New Zealanders and we're doing it through the $100 cap. I'd like to acknowledge the Minister the Hon Kris Faafoi who's brought this bill to the House. I'd like to acknowledge the officials who worked hard on this bill through its passage. I'd like to acknowledge the Transport and Infrastructure Committee chair Darroch Ball who's done an excellent job chairing—a very fair chair. It's been an honour for me to be a part of the select committee who has helped to shepherd this bill through the House. So look there have been a few aspects around signage and other—but the key point here and I'll close with this is that we're putting a $100 limit on wheel clampers. I commend this bill to the House."
King MattLAND TRANSPORT (WHEEL CLAMPING) AMENDMENT BILLThird ReadingDebate resumed from 12 November.MATT KING (National—Northland): This is the day for it isn't it? End of time—nearly 6 p.m. on a Thursday. All the senior staff have gone home and there's just the junior staff left holding the fort—class of 2017". We're here to talk about the Land Transport (Wheel Clamping) Amendment Bill third reading—a hugely complex bit of legislation. It sets out the rules for clamping vehicles—25 submissions seven oral. The idea was to take the cowboys out of the industry.Everything we've talked about in the previous readings. There's a good reason for having this bit of legislation. It's not major crime but it will serve its purpose.The one thing I wanted to touch on—the one thing that came out of the submissions—was the fee of $100. As a select committee we agonised over it and the sole wheel clamper talked about—I'm killing time by the way because we're nearly at knock off. Nicola Willis: You're doing well Matt. MATT KING: Am I doing well? Thank you. So the $100 fee was uneconomic for some wheel clampers to stay in business and I understand that—I've run a couple of businesses myself. What sort of I guess concerned me was the lack of concern expressed by some members of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee over that $100 fee because being a business owner or being a former business owner I thought we'd have a better attitude towards maybe setting a fee that could keep wheel clampers in business. However it's a democratic process the select committee and I got well and truly voted down so we've got the $100. The Green member was there voting me down. The New Zealand First chair was voting me down so I felt all alone. I felt all alone like Andrew Little sometimes; I felt all alone. But anyway that's by the by.There are a few good things in there. There is—Dan Bidois: Matt you've done your two minutes now. MATT KING: I've got two minutes to go. There's a story on—I can't concentrate now. There's a story in relation to allowing police powers to deal with wheel clampers and being ex-police I think that's a great idea. And there's also some exclusion of liability for—I think it's where a vehicle owner has tried to get the wheel clamp removed and hasn't been able to get hold of the business owner that owns the wheel clamping business and there's a facility in there for them to be able to remove the wheel clamp as long as they minimise the damage. So that's a good clause in there. Also in relation to the disputes tribunal there's a clause in there that helps with making it compatible with the disputes tribunal. But all the matters have been well traversed so I don't need to go on any more. I would like to commend this bill to the House."
Parliamentary Agencies Delegations Legislation Bill — Third Reading
Woodhouse MichaelHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): I am truly humbled to be a small part of what is such a special moment in the political career of the Hon Andrew Little. This is indeed a zenith in his career with his moving of the third reading of the Parliamentary Agencies Delegations Legislation Bill so I think we should take a moment just to reflect on that and to say to the Minister that the only way from here is down but I hope he does enjoy that moment. I must say I was incredibly impressed at the fact that he was able to make that speech last eight minutes. He could have read the bill five times in the time it took him to give his third reading speech. But it is indeed a special moment and I want to congratulate the Minister on this great achievement. I'm also very pleased to be the only National Party member who will speak in the third reading and pleased to confirm not only our support for this bill but our support for the Minister's comments of commendation for the excellent work that we benefit from from the Office of the Clerk and the Parliamentary Service. There is no doubt that we are indeed well served by the men and women who work in both of those organisations and I'm confident that that will continue. Magic" is probably not the word that I would use to describe the changes that are being set out in this bill but I am the member who has expressed something of a caveat on this bill. I didn't ever say that it was the thin end of the wedge or that I was fearful of these changes and so on that basis I do think it is appropriate just to set out that small caveat that I have about this. I understand the intention of the bill but the bill isn't worded in the way that it is intended. Mary Harris' comment about the sanctity of the independence of the Clerk is absolutely right but I will remind the House that the powers that we are giving through this bill are as set out in clause 4 the delegation of any of the functions of the Office of the Clerk to a person described in new section 12(1A) of the Clerk of the House of Representatives Act which is the Parliamentary Service and vice versa in clause 6 amending Schedule 1 of the Parliamentary Service Act. So I have been encouraged by the sponsoring Minister's comments that indeed that's not the intention but I simply pointed out in a previous intervention that the powers we were giving were wider than the intended process. But I understand what the Government is intending to do. This is administrative; it is back-office functions. I have to say the Minister's comments around the possibility that the Bellamy's staff might provide something approaching political advice to the Government has a certain merit because it may well be better than the advice that they are taking at least much less than they are giving. And certainly I indeed have had some very intelligent conversations with Bellamy's staff on matters particularly in relation to this Government. But with those words and with my special tribute to the Minister for reaching the zenith in his career I'm happy to commend the bill to the House.Bill read a third time."
Sexual Violence Legislation Bill — First Reading
Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): Thank you Madam Speaker. Look there's not much I'm going to add to the technicalities around this bill today. Just on the first reading the one thing I've noticed actually sitting here listening to all the speakers whether it be current Ministers or previous Ministers is the will for everybody to work closely on this bill—the invitations for ex-Ministers to come along to select committees. This is a hugely important issue and it's something that I feel very proud about and hope that we can make some progress on as we move forward. So I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Hayes JoanneJO HAYES (National): I'm honoured to stand and take a call on the first reading of the Sexual Violence Legislation Bill. I too want to add my acknowledgments to the Minister for Justice the Hon Andrew Little and the Parliamentary Under-Secretary Jan Logie who has I would say dedicated her life to this area of this legislation and to representing women and speaking up for women.I'm also the co-chair of Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians and this is an area that we all support very strongly. We are concerned about the protection—the rights—of women and girls and this bill is one that is right within our line of sight.It does give confidence to me that the judiciary will have the tools to be able to hear women's concerns around sexual violence without hopefully re-traumatising them. A lot of what I've heard today—I endorse the speakers from the other side because everything that they've said is so true. Consent is consent. No is no. It doesn't mean any other word. No means no. Women should be able to live their lives freely and be able to participate in whatever activities there are without the fear of being raped or trapped.This is what this bill is about. This bill is going to be able to empower the judiciary to be able to protect those women the victims that are coming forward in laying complaints and for them to be heard. For every 100 sexual violence incidents that have been reported to the police only 31 made it to court and only 11 of them resulted in a conviction with only six going to jail. These are I think very low statistics for an Act that has been so kind of hidden in behind the scenes because of the way the judiciary had been dealing with them in the courts. I would like to say to the Minister and to Jan well done. Well done in getting this bill here. I know that National when we were in Government did a lot of work around violence sexual violence and I think this adds more and grows that area as well.So without any further ado I support this bill. I would like to see it head off to the select committee. I know the Justice Committee will give this bill a very good review with the submitters also being able to come in and put in their concerns as well. So without any further ado I commend the bill to the House.
New Zealand Māori Arts and Crafts Institute Vesting Bill — Second Reading
Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): It's a pleasure to take a very short call this afternoon. Look I haven't been on the Māori Affairs Committee that's been working through this bill but I've heard some really good conversations this afternoon. I always enjoy pieces of legislation like this that you know take some opportunity to take some assets from the Crown and present them back to an iwi group where they will be really appreciated and valued. And it is my pleasure to commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Bidois DanDAN BIDOIS (National—Northcote): Kia ora. Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā. It is a pleasure to speak in the second reading of the New Zealand Māori Arts and Crafts Institute Vesting Bill. Can I just acknowledge the aroha that I'm hearing in the House today. This is a good occasion for progress in Rotorua for an important organisation in New Zealand's indigenous history and it's a pleasure to speak on behalf of this bill.Can I also acknowledge my fellow members of the Māori Affairs Committee. Certainly I tautoko everything that's been said to date. I was also at the submission hearings in Rotorua as a fresh member of the select committee and can I just say that it was an enriching environment and certainly the first experience that I've had on that committee of recognising some of the dynamics that go on inside Māoridom. It was an interesting experience to say the least but I'm really really happy that we've found a way forward for the various hapū in this vesting bill to get along and to move forward.So can I just acknowledge the kaupapa for this bill. It transfers the ownership of the New Zealand Māori Arts and Crafts Institute (NZMACI) to the iwi/hapū. And of course there's two in particular that we're dealing with: Wāhiao Tūhourangi and Ngāti Whakauē. These are two very important very passionate hapū and we heard it loud and clear that they want this bill to go forward that they approve of the kaupapa of this bill; they just want us to tidy up a few things to make sure that the entity that was established was going to be in operation for the best interests of all parties involved.So this bill recognises the history of NZMACI and the contribution that the iwi and the various hapū groups have made to the success of what is a very important institution for New Zealand. It is as I understand the only institution of its kind in our country so that's very unique for NZMACI and it's great to now have a framework established a set-up where iwi and the various hapū that are involved look after the long-term sustainability of this organisation. Look there have been a number of changes that were made in the select committee process some of which were canvassed already so I won't go into that too much. But I do just want to acknowledge everybody that's been a part of this: of course the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell; the current Minister Nanaia Mahuta; Tamati Coffey—it's been great to have your expertise and knowledge of the local dynamics on the select committee so thank you for your contribution. Of course to the iwi and hapū members that submitted thank you for your contribution. The advisers have been outstanding for this bill and I'm sure the select committee members will acknowledge that. Without their expertise I don't think we would be where we are at today. That is all I want to say on the bill. I commend this bill in its second reading to the House.
King MattMATT KING (National—Northland): It is a real honour to be able to speak on the bill—this bill the New Zealand Māori Arts and Crafts Institute Vesting Bill. I'm a relatively new member of the Māori Affairs Committee and I wasn't involved in this one. I wasn't involved in heading down there to have a look and to listen to the people and to understand what it's about but I do have a little bit of an understanding of it. It is a real asset for us as New Zealanders that beautiful place and it's great that the ownership is being passed to iwi in this bill. I know the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell as Māori development Minister—it's one of many many good things that he did in his time in Parliament and he has a hand in this with the Whakarewarewa Joint Trust signing the vesting agreement over to the Rotowhio Marae at Te Puia. It's one of many good things that he's done.As I said before I wasn't on the select committee but I'm aware of what this is all about and I know that some changes made at the select committee involved changes made to the trust deed which made this more accountable for the beneficiaries. I know that 89 percent of the 2000 eligible voters supported it so it's well supported and it's a significant step in the strengthening of the relationship between the Crown at the Wāhiao Tūhourangi and Ngāti Whakauē.It's also important for Rotorua. It's a vibrant business. Te Puia is a vibrant business and an icon in the tourism scene. When people fly into Auckland International Airport a large number of them turn right and go to Rotorua. I would like to encourage them to turn left and travel north as well. We have a lot to offer in Northland.Hon Amy Adams: A paid presentation.MATT KING: Yes yeah. After all we are the birthplace of the nation and all that. But yeah this is a real asset and we're here to talk about this.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Indeed.MATT KING: Ha ha! That was a paid advertisement for Northland tourism. It's an exciting period of growth with $22 million being spent in developments recently. It ensures the pan-iwi cultural functions provided by the Māori Arts and Crafts Institute in training the next generation of carvers weavers and sculptors will continue and it ensures the protection of this legacy for future generations.Pretty much everything has been said. I acknowledge the last speaker and our previous speaker Harete Hipango for talking and covering all the—Hon Amy Adams: Jo Hayes.MATT KING: And Jo Hayes of course yeah—covering it all. And you'll hear an outstanding contribution from Nicola Willis later. I commend this bill to the House.
Members' Bills — Crimes (Definition of Female Genital Mutilation) Amendment Bill—Procedure
Hayes JoanneJO HAYES (National): Thank you Madam Speaker and I'm privileged to stand and take a call in the second reading of the New Zealand Māori Arts and Crafts Institute Vesting Bill. I want to acknowledge the submitters to the bill. There were 74 submissions received by the Māori Affairs Committee and we heard 40 of them. Our day in Rotorua started very early and finished quite late. I just want to not only acknowledge my select committee colleagues and our chair Rino Tirikatene but also make comment of the member for Waiariki who was how I would describe marathon man" that day in that he kept the questions flowing. Every single submitter was questioned to the hilt by Tamati Coffey and by the end of it we looked over at him and he was totally exhausted. He really did a lot of work that day to support his whānau and his hapū and his iwi.I want to acknowledge Ngāti Whakauē. They have done an amazing job and Wāhiao and Tūhourangi for the coming together of those iwi to make sure that there was some smooth transition into the vesting of this institute.I too want to make comment of the educational facilities that Te Puia provide not just to Rotorua but nationally as well. The iwi have come together and have supported and provided an amazing facility in Rotorua and for all of Māoridom. We can all be proud of the work that they have done.It is pleasing to see that 89 percent of the 2000-plus eligible voters supported the vesting bill which made it so much better. Although you know like all of our Māori bills at times they don't go as smoothly and so we did have a submission from the hapū of Ngāti Whakauē—Ngāti Hurungaterangi Ngāti Taeotu and Ngāti Kahu otherwise known as HTK—who came and submitted their concerns. I mean that's what submitting to a select committee is all about. I just want to say that we heard them—everybody heard them—and we were still able to go forward at the end of the day.Without any further ado the work that iwi have done in Rotorua to getting to this stage has been monumental. They have waited so long as the Minister for Māori Development outlined in her contribution from when the idea started to take shape those many years ago and then the visit of the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell in 2017 to really get the joint trust moving and get all vesting agreements and discussions going. So it is my pleasure on this side of the House to commend this bill and look forward to the third reading. Thank you."
Upston Louise; Mallard TrevorQuestion No. 4 to MinisterHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): I seek leave to have my question held over to the next sitting day.SPEAKER: Right. The question is that the question is held over. There was no suggestion it was an additional question. Is there any objection? There's no objection to it being held over.
Hayes Joanne; Mallard TrevorMOTIONSCrimes (Definition of Female Genital Mutilation) Amendment Bill—Introduction and First Reading ArrangementsJO HAYES (National): Thank you. I seek leave to move members' notice of motion No. 2 in my name relating to the introduction of the Crimes (Definition of Female Genital Mutilation) Amendment Bill without debate.SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is none. JO HAYES (National): I move That the Crimes (Definition of Female Genital Mutilation) Amendment Bill be introduced as a member's bill on 4 December 2019 without requiring a notice of proposal and selection in a ballot despite Standing Orders 278 to 281; that the bill be in the name of four members and that three out of the four members in charge of the bill must agree in order for the bill to be discharged or postponed under Standing Orders 74(1)(b) and 303(1)(d); and that the bill be set down for first reading as Members' order of the day No. 1 on the first Members' day following 4 December 2019 despite Standing Order 285(2).Motion agreed to.
Hipkins Chris; Woodhouse MichaelTHURSDAY 14 NOVEMBER 2019The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Karakia.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Thank you Mr Speaker. Legislation to be considered next week will include the first reading of the Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission Bill; the second readings of the Referendums Frameworks Bill the Ombudsman (Protection of Name) Amendment Bill and the Credit Contracts Legislation Bill; and further stages of the Farm Debt Mediation Bill (No 2) and the National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill (No 2).Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): I thank the Leader of the House. Can he confirm that Government order of the day No. 20 notice of motion on the sessional order of Parliament TV coverage will be debated on Tuesday next week?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Yes absolutely it's our intention to do that straight after question time on Tuesday.
Tuesday 12 November 2019 - Volume 742
Criminal Cases Review Commission Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Criminal Cases Review Commission Bill be now read a third time.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.Bill read a third time.
9. Question No. 9—EducationJAN TINETTI (Labour) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 9—Education9. JAN TINETTI (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What changes if any is the Government making to strengthen the system of governance management and administration of schools?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): The Government's reform of the Tomorrow's Schools system will put more front-line support closer to schools so that they can give every child the best chance to succeed. We're making pragmatic and workable improvements that we believe will gain broad support. Our changes will influence how the Government's $9.5 billion schooling budget is spent and it will result in better targeted and earlier support for boards stronger leadership support structures for school principals and leaders and a reset of the relationship between schools and the Ministry of Education. Jan Tinetti: What if anything will these changes mean for school leaders? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: One of the key pieces of feedback that we've had from school leaders for some time is that the role of the principal in particular can be very isolated and isolating. Through the reform announced today we'll be providing a leadership centre and support for local leadership advisors to better support school principals; there'll be new minimum principal eligibility requirements; and we'll be giving stronger incentives to school principals to lead schools that are underperforming or isolated. Jan Tinetti: What if anything will these changes mean for boards of trustees? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The board of trustees model—the idea of self-governing schools—will continue. Boards of trustees will have more support and guidance they'll have access to more training and support needs for their identified areas of improvement a code of conduct will be put in place for school boards of trustees and they'll have a more balanced set of objectives. Enrolment zone decisions will also now be made on a local or regional basis rather than on an individual school basis. Jan Tinetti: What if anything will these changes mean for parents and learners? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: One of the most visible things that will change is that parents and students will have access to free local complaints and dispute resolution panels where they have serious disputes with a school. This is something I know school boards of trustees will also welcome. School communities will have a stronger voice in how school rules are set. Schools currently have a significant regulation-making power but no duty or obligation to consult with their local communities on how they use that. It's a bit of an aberration in that regard in the regulatory space and the reforms will address that. Overall this will provide more support to parents to learners to school leaders to school boards and to school communities.
4. Question No. 4—EducationHon NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 4—Education4. Hon NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) to the Minister of Education: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Absolutely. I particularly stand by the largest investment by a New Zealand Government in school property and the first national plan for managing school growth in classrooms: 2000 more teachers being supported into teaching after inheriting a 40 percent decline in teacher training enrolments. I stand by the largest pay rise for teachers in a decade. I stand by the decision to make New Zealand history taught in all schools and kura by 2020 and I particularly stand by the decision to abolish NCEA fees for 168000 young New Zealanders.Hon Nikki Kaye: What is the total cost of today's Government announcements on Tomorrow's Schools given his statement in April that the final Tomorrow's Schools task force report would be subject to rigorous cost-benefit analysis?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The cost of actually producing the report is 0.03 percent of the $9.5 billion a year that we spend on schooling.Hon Nikki Kaye: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was: what is the total cost of the Government's announcements not the task force report.SPEAKER: You mean the policies announced not the cost of the announcement?Hon Nikki Kaye: Yes that was what my question was.SPEAKER: Did the member say the policy announcements" or the "announcement"?Hon Nikki Kaye: I said the Government's announcements on Tomorrow's Schools.SPEAKER: Well I think it has been answered.Hon Nikki Kaye: Does he stand by his statement that this is not about more centralisation and smothering of boards given that he today has transferred all decision-making powers around enrolment schemes from boards to officials?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The decisions around enrolment schemes replicate the approach taken by the previous National Government with regard to enrolment schemes in Christchurch.Hon Nikki Kaye: Will he guarantee that it will not be mandatory for all of the 19000 school boards of trustees in New Zealand to undertake training?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The Government has not decided to make training mandatory for school boards and that's clear in the documentation we released today.Hon Nikki Kaye: Will he consider reversing some of his Tomorrow's Schools decisions today given that there will be less parental choice in New Zealand as a result of enrolment decisions and too much power for officials?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I completely reject the premise of the member's question."
3. Question No. 3—FinanceTAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 3—Finance3. TAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of Finance: He aha ngā rīpoata hou kua kitea e ia mō te ōhanga o Aotearoa?[What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?]Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Atu kōrero pai—more good news. Last week Stats NZ released labour market statistics which showed that wage growth as measured by the labour cost index reached its fastest annual growth in a decade in the September quarter. On a separate measure average ordinary time hourly earnings rose by 4.2 percent in the September year. With annual inflation at 1.5 percent across the same period it's clear that Kiwi workers are finally starting to see a real increase in wages after missing out for years under the previous Government.Tamati Coffey: What did the labour market report say about the scale of wage increases?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: According to the Stats New Zealand data 59 percent of workers received an increase in salary and ordinary-time wage rates over the year to September. The last time the proportion was higher than this was over a decade ago. The proportion of workers that did not get a pay rise was at its lowest level in over a decade and the proportion of workers who received a pay increase of more than 3 percent reached its highest in a decade. What this shows is that not only are average wages going up but wages are also going up for more people and by higher amounts.Tamati Coffey: How does wage growth in New Zealand compare with international counterparts?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The latest OECD data shows that New Zealand's wage growth this year has outstripped the UK the US Japan Germany France Italy Spain Denmark Finland Sweden and the European Union average. This is yet another indication of the strength of the New Zealand economy compared to our international peers. Despite international headwinds and a slowing global economy businesses are continuing to invest in their workers meaning more money in the pockets of New Zealanders.
Swarbrick Chlöe; Dyson RuthCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green): E Te Māngai tēnā koe. Tēnā koutou e Te Whare. It is a pleasure to rise and speak to this bill at probably 9.59-odd. The Green Party of course supports this very common-sense piece of legislation that being the Land Transport (Wheel Clamping) Amendment Bill. It's been well canvassed by a number of speakers before myself about the predatory behaviour that a number of these cowboy clampers—in the words of my colleague Chris Bishop—behave in charging exorbitant amounts of money to folks who oftentimes don't think that they have been privy to adequate signage.However it also has to be canvassed the issue of that kind of balance that is required that balance being that when somebody does park on somebody else's property when that property is used as a place of business or in the instance of my colleague the Hon Meka Whaitiri as her electorate office it is indeed the case that that parking spot—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): I'm sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for me to leave the Chair.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 10 p.m.
Walker HamishHAMISH WALKER (National—Clutha-Southland): It is a real privilege to stand up at 9.57 on a Tuesday night to discuss the Land Transport (Wheel Clamping) Amendment Bill. This is a very important bill. I've got some experience with companies that tow cars as does Denise Lee as of just Saturday night. Denise Lee had a fantastic concert at U2 and unfortunately afterwards after having a few good hours at U2 she came back and what do you know the car's up on the tow truck. So that was a good lesson for Denise but she covered her tracks very well as you would have seen in the media. She's very quick on her feet. She said It wasn't my fault because I parked the car and I went to the concert but unfortunately I parked my car a bit too quick as the barriers"—apparently they changed the barriers. They used to put the barriers closer to Mt Smart Stadium and then she got caught out. So Denise Lee—it's a shame she's not speaking on this good bill. She would have a few good things to say.This is a good bill. There's often a power imbalance with some of these towing companies. Often they turn up to your car—predatory behaviour—they'll charge in one case from a submitter $740 dollars. Seven hundred and forty dollars for a person that was in a car park for 90 minutes. You may ask: how is that fair? I don't believe it is but if you need your car back and your car's worth more than about a thousand dollars of course you're going to pay them the money to get the car back. If you want to take action often action can take weeks if not months in the local courts or through mediation. So it's good that this bill's sorting out that power imbalance with some of these companies.There's no parking wardens in parts of Clutha-Southland. There's none in Milton Balclutha Gore—there's part-time ones in Gore. In Queenstown there are part-time parking meters as well. So just for Denise Lee: if you're watching this Denise it may pay for you to move down to Clutha-Southland and your car won't be towed. National supports this bill."
Ball DarrochDARROCH BALL (NZ First): Thank you Madam Speaker. It is a pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First in support of the Land Transport (Wheel Clamping) Amendment Bill. I also would like to congratulate the Minister Kris Faafoi for bringing in this bill and getting it through the House and also seeing it through the entire process including the select committee. All those who are on the Transport and Infrastructure Committee can understand that when we first got it to the select committee it seemed on the face of it quite a simple bill and we thought it would go through quite easily but it seemed that when we opened one door and closed that another three opened and we had to go through them. It was a can of worms really solving this issue and I think that it was because it was so unregulated that when we started sort of to pick up sticks if you like it started affecting a whole lot of other different things.I think that Mr Bishop actually brought up a good point which was that I think the complicated nature of this issue has caused other jurisdictions to actually ban clamping outright.I agree that this could be a conversation in the future and this would be an interesting one to have but I think that what we've got in front of us which is a piece of legislation that is quite balanced and throughout the whole process—not just the Transport and Infrastructure Committee but that was the main backbone of it coming up with this legislation but also all of the stages and including the previous stage which was coming up with a balanced but focused piece of legislation and getting that balance between the retailers the companies that do the clamping and also the people who have fallen victim to the cowboy clampers in unacceptable situations which we all agree we can't let carry on. There are examples where we've had $600 $700 $800 for a fee for getting rid of an immobiliser or a clamp for being two minutes over or even clamping when there's children still in the car. So something needed to be done and I congratulate the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs for bringing this legislation to the House and coming up with what is a good step forward in dealing with those issues.One of the issues that was brought up also because it was a big one in the select committee was the issue of the signage but also the big one was the $100 cap. That was debated quite—not heatedly but in-depth and—Chris Bishop: Collegially.DARROCH BALL: Yeah collegially in-depth and we believe that we've come up with a solution a balanced one and a focused one but also one that can be addressed through regulations in the future which I also think is quite an important part of this legislation.So New Zealand First supports this bill and congratulates the House on supporting it. Thank you Madam Speaker.
Whaitiri MekaHon MEKA WHAITIRI (Labour—Ikaroa-Rāwhiti): Tēnā koe Madam Speaker. I'm happy to take a call on this. Can I commend the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs for taking action on a problem that hasn't just evaporised it hasn't just occurred in the last two years; it's been around for a long long long time: wheel clamping and the impact it's had on people who legitimately go about their daily lives. So for the consumers for the business owners and for the clamping operators themselves this bill simply clarifies and ensures that those that are resorting to clamping have a $100 limit—that's both for the operators as well as those who are subjected to clamping.I just want to share a wee story in supporting this particular bill as a business lease owner of one of my electoral offices—I have four throughout my electorate of Ikaroa-Rāwhiti. In one particular part of my electorate Hastings I am constantly having the back door of my property filled up with our neighbours parking in it. So from a business lease owner it is hugely disruptive when you are trying to deal with constituents on a daily basis that that's the only parking slot and yet we have people constantly parking where they shouldn't be despite the signs saying it's private. Do I want them clamped? No—no I don't. But if they were clamped I'd like to ensure that the bill that protects both those that are clamped and those that apply the clamps is really really clear. So this is what the Land Transport (Wheel Clamping) Amendment Bill is doing.So I want to commend the Minister for taking action as quickly as he has. I'm no longer on the Transport and Infrastructure Committee; I was there when this bill first came to us and yes there was very heated debate as members on that select committee—Chris Bishop: We want you back.Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: Thank you very much; I'd love to come back. But we had some very I felt constructive debates around ensuring that this bill was fit for purpose. We had several submitters that came in but what I do want to commend the chair of that select committee Mr Darroch Ball for is inviting more of the clampers to appear in front of the select committee to ensure before we reported back to the House that we had canvassed their views. So I want to commend the actions of the select committee as I left that they took those particular actions so that we were making a piece of legislation that also took into perspective those clamping operators. And I want to commend those that appeared before the select committee and put their views forward.It is a simple bill. It does set clear regulations around it. I believe both consumers—like I said business operators and clamping operators themselves will welcome this clear simple piece of legislation. On that note I commend it to the House.
Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition to this bill as the last National Party speaker on the Criminal Cases Review Commission Bill. I do want to just acknowledge the sentiment of what the Hon Clare Curran was saying there around the importance of justice and the importance to ensure that we don't see miscarriages of justice taking place. But the problem with this bill is it is not going to solve that. It's not going to create a perfect system. It's not going to actually stop miscarriages of justice happening in the first place. All this bill is doing is setting up another process whereby another body is able to look into a case and make a decision as to whether this case should be referred to the Court of Appeal; that's simply what it does and actually that's already what people have the right to be able to do. They have the right to be able to appeal their cases and to appeal to the Court of Appeal who can then make a decision as to whether there are grounds for something to be re-looked at and looked into.The issue here in our court system is actually issues of timeliness which need to be sorted issues of representation issues which actually will make our system faster and fairer so that people do have access to justice and access to ensuring they have access to the appellate courts as well.I do just want to reiterate the point made by my colleague Chris Penk who has been standing up talking about victims. The Hon Clare Curran might say No we need to get justice." and I agree but let's also talk about victims because they are also part of the picture here. When you have a process which allows those who have been convicted to simply go to this new body to try and find potentially try and find another grounds another way to get to the Court of Appeal where there may or may not have been a miscarriage of justice why shouldn't victims be notified? Why shouldn't the victim of that crime actually be notified? I think it's a real shame that they aren't even notified that their case may be being reviewed by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. That is something which is fundamental to our criminal justice system is the recognition of victims and their rights. It should not be something which is given tokenism which is what this piece of legislation does.The National Party does not support this bill."