edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Thank you Mr Chair. I probably won't take a very long call actually I think we're still under the standing—[Interruption] I know such a disappointment! Look I could read all the lists of those who fall under this but no I've got a serious question for the member in the chair Parmjeet Parmar. It's actually always a great honour to take the role to be in the chair as the member sponsoring this private bill—obviously the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Amendment Bill—I think it's actually one of the great challenges to the House that we may need at times to find shorter titles and that's no disrespect to the particular member. Look at the moment we're talking around the preamble. I suppose my question to the member is very simply: why do we have a preamble? This is highly highly unusual and I'm not trying to be completely flippant. Sorry there's always an element of flippancy in my speeches. But why do we have a preamble I think would be helpful to know because when I do think of preambles I turn my mind to such august documents as the Constitution of the United States the Declaration of Independence. And I'm just wondering whether the member in the seat does see that there's some convergence between those great constitutional documents and this amendment bill. But in all seriousness with a little humour aside I wouldn't mind understanding why there is a necessity for this preamble to exist. I suspect reading it through it's relatively narrative it's explanatory but that's relatively unusual in New Zealand law. We often look towards committee reports and if you will the overall Hansard. Well what's recorded in Hansard the overall debates—I'd be interested for the member to explain why there is a preamble. In some ways why is—well we don't appear to have what we will often have; it's not so much the purpose section but definitions"; that's the word I'm looking for. In some ways if she would like to answer that some of the usual elements we'd see in definitions such as what "GAAP" means the acronym "GAAP"—has that just been deliberately incorporated into the preamble? So to the extent that she would like to take a call and explain it would be welcome."
SpeechDr JIAN YANG (National): Thank you Mr Chair. I rise to speak briefly on this bill. In particular I want to thank Dr Parmjeet Parmar for sponsoring the bill. It's a very good bill and of course we had unanimous support at the Governance and Administration Committee. Also I would like to thank all the submitters for their contribution—we had 15 submissions and they made a great contribution to this particular bill—and of course all committee members for their contribution. Now most importantly of course as the previous two speakers Dr Parmjeet Parmar and Priyanca Radhakrishnan have mentioned this bill is trying to correct an anomaly. Now it's very clear that these amenities need to have two sets of financial reports which of course we believe is unnecessary. In terms of the submissions I would like to mention particularly the amenities board which was established under the principal Act. The amenities board itself has been a promoter of this particular bill. I look at his submission. It's a very substantive submission with all the details of process and the reasons why we need this particular bill. Before the bill was submitted they did a lot of consultation with the stakeholders and also with Government agencies. Therefore this bill as it came to the House and the committee is actually a very good bill; although later on we made some changes amendments. We'll come to these amendments later on when we come to the different parts. The amenities board actually engaged with a number of stakeholders—and then in terms of reporting requirements of a funding board and also this process for drafting this particular bill the Parliamentary Counsel Office made good suggestions—and consulted with the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment and other agencies. So the bill itself in that sense has been quite comprehensive. Also there are various—what we call—pre-legislative procedures. Now they did go through the normal pre-legislative procedures and consulted with all the amenities. These amenities themselves we are quite familiar with. We are from Auckland so we are quite familiar with these amenities. For example—people mentioned the Auckland Festival Trust and also Auckland Philharmonia and also Auckland Regional Rescue Helicopter Trust. All these are quite familiar to us and also quite important to our daily life. As a matter of fact I myself encourage some people to donate to the Auckland Regional Rescue Helicopter Trust. I also remember I took my children to the observatory. These amenities are important to us not only for just our own life but also to our younger generation.To help these amenities of course I believe is a common interest—a common intention. That is why the bill enjoys support from different parties. To make it even better of course we made some other changes later on. Now as I said we'll come to these amendments later. Overall I think this is a very good bill and I again thank Dr Parmjeet Parmar I thank all the submitters and I thank all the members of the committee. Of course we'll talk to other points later on. Thanks.
Rurawhe AdrianAUCKLAND REGIONAL AMENITIES FUNDING AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one debate.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Tuesday 16 June 2020 - Volume 746
COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Bill — First Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Bill be reported to the House by 29 June 2020 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 191 193 and 194(1)(b) and (c).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.Motion agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 119New Zealand National 55; New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8; Ross.Noes 1ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Environment Committee.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Reform) Amendment 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.
Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Reform) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Appropriation (2020/21 Estimates) Bill be now read a second time.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.Bill read a second time.
12. Question No. 12—HealthDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour) to the Minister of HealthQuestion No. 12—Health12. Dr LIZ CRAIG (Labour) to the Minister of Health: How is the Government responding to the Health and Disability System Review? Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Health): Today I released the Health and Disability System Review which is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to tackle the long-term challenges our health and disability system is facing. The review confirms what I think the COVID-19 global pandemic has shown us all: we have a very good health and disability system. But it also found that our health and disability workforces are under considerable stress and that our system is complex and fragmented. This review sets out a path towards a better more sustainable health system with clear lines of accountability one that is more responsive to the needs of local communities. Cabinet has accepted the case for reform and the direction of travel outlined in the review—specifically changes that will reduce fragmentation strengthen leadership and accountability and improve equity of access and outcomes for all New Zealanders. Dr Liz Craig: So what are the key findings and recommendations of the review? Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The review has made a series of far-reaching recommendations. They include shifting to a greater focus on population health creating a new Crown entity—provisionally called Health New Zealand—focused on the operational delivery of health and disabilities services and financial performance reducing the number of DHBs from the current 20 down to eight to 12 within five years creating a Māori health authority to advise on all aspects of Māori health policy and to monitor and report on the performance of the system and greater integration between primary and community care and hospital specialist services. Local planning must drive decisions. Our health and disability system needs to better understand the real needs of the community and when and where services should be available. Dr Liz Craig: So what are the next steps for implementing the recommendations of the review? Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Reforming our health and disability system is a massive undertaking and it will not happen overnight. Meaningful change and improvement will take concerted effort over many years. Decisions on individual recommendations will be taken to Cabinet over coming months and into the term of the next Parliament. Cabinet has agreed that a small group of Ministers should drive these reforms. That will be led by the Prime Minister and will include the Minister of Finance myself as Minister of Health and Associate Minister of Health Peeni Henare. I will also be appointing a ministerial committee to provide ongoing expert advice on implementation and improving system performance and equity of outcomes and an implementation team will also be set up to lead the detailed policy and design work. It will be administered by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
10. Question No. 10—TransportCHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South) to the Minister of TransportQuestion No. 10—Transport10. CHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South) to the Minister of Transport: Has he read the text of the 29 February 2020 email from the office of Rt Hon Winston Peters to him on Auckland light rail; if not why not? Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Transport): Yes. Chris Bishop: Why did he not read it to prepare for question time on 11 June 2020 when I asked him about the email? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: That's not the question that the member asked me in the last question time exchange. Chris Bishop: Why did I not—why did he not—[Interruption]SPEAKER: Order! I think that's even. Chris Bishop: Why did he not read the email before question time on 11 June 2020 when I asked him to read out the text of the email? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Because it's not in the public interest to release the content of communications that are necessary to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the free and frank exchange of opinions during the cross-party consultation process. Chris Bishop: How did he know it wasn't in the public interest to disclose the contents of the email on 11 June when he hadn't read the email before 11 June? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well I had read the attachment to the email but not the email. SPEAKER: Question No. 11—Chris Bishop: No—supplementary. SPEAKER: Oh sorry. Chris Bishop: Sorry Mr Speaker I was reclining in my chair. Does the attachment to the email contain a statement of position from the New Zealand First Party on the Auckland light rail project? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Yes. Chris Bishop: Does the attachment to the email that contains a statement of position from New Zealand First indicate that the New Zealand First Party does not support the project being considered by Cabinet? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well as I've said to the member about five times now it's not in the public interest to reveal the content of that message. Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wonder if the Minister would be kind enough to explain to the House how you can not open an email but still read its attachment. SPEAKER: Well I'm sure what we can do is arrange for the member to be briefed on that. I know every now and again both of us have issues with our computers but I'm sure we can get an explanation for him as to how sometimes other people print things off and give them to people or things like that.
9. Question No. 9—RevenueDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of RevenueQuestion No. 9—Revenue9. Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of Revenue: What action has the Government taken to help ease the impact of COVID-19 on taxpayers' end-of-year assessments? Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Revenue): The Government has taken decisive and considered action to support taxpayers through the COVID-19 pandemic. To ease financial stress for taxpayers we are changing the rules around write-offs for tax debt. Inland Revenue Department's end-of-year automatic income tax calculation process for individuals is currently under way and expected to run until early July. It is the annual wash-up which results in people either having tax to pay or receiving a refund. For the 2019-20 income tax year this Government made a decision that tax payable up to $200 will be written off. The usual threshold for writing off tax is $50. Dr Deborah Russell: How many taxpayers will be affected by the increase in the write-off threshold? Hon STUART NASH: Increasing the write-off threshold from $50 to $200 will reduce tax bills for approximately 149000 taxpayers. Writing off those amounts of tax may not seem huge to everyone but it can be significant for someone experiencing financial stress. In the 2018-19 year for example around half of those who had a tax bill up to $200 were earning less than $60000 a year. We're doing everything we can to help households as we move into the economic recovery phase post-COVID-19. Dr Deborah Russell: What other relief will be of assistance to taxpayers for the end-of-year tax process? Hon STUART NASH: The changes to the IRD systems under the Business Transformation process in 2019 allowed for most individual taxpayers to have their end-of-year tax assessment calculated automatically. The auto-calc process has meant that people have already started receiving their tax refunds. As at 10 June there have been 2.3 million assessments carried out—that's 1.3 million more customers than at the same time last year. To date the IRD has paid out over $610 million in tax refunds and over $30 million has been written off. Once the process is complete Inland Revenue expects to issue refunds in excess of $650 million as part of the individual income tax assessment process.
6. Question No. 6—Regional Economic DevelopmentMARK PATTERSON (NZ First) to the Minister for Regional Economic DevelopmentQuestion No. 6—Regional Economic Development6. MARK PATTERSON (NZ First) to the Minister for Regional Economic Development: What recent milestones has the Provincial Growth Fund achieved? Hon SHANE JONES (Minister for Regional Economic Development): Mr Speaker this answer might be a tad longer given the extent of the popularity of the growth fund. The Nelson Food Factory opened its doors last week and announced it was partly related to the $778000 Provincial Growth Fund investment. It provides a collaborative and supportive environment and it will house businesses of particular relevance to the sitting member known such as the Mad Melon processing and bottling watermelon juice; Little Beauties; and Fresh2U. To show that we are working on areas that are neglected such as the Tai Poutini and other such far-flung areas we are rolling out and creating jobs to the level of 30 local people on the Kawatiri Coastal Trail. The final thing I would say is that at the end of April 2020 $2.8 billion of the fund has been committed to specific sectors or projects $1.4 billion has been contracted $544 million has been paid to recipients and 557 projects have been contracted. SPEAKER: Before the supplementary is asked I'm going to ask the member whether he reflected on the local member in that answer. Hon SHANE JONES: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: It's a straight question—it's a yes or a no. Hon SHANE JONES: No I'm taking a point of order. SPEAKER: Well I'm—actually I was first and therefore you will respond. The member will respond to my very simple question. Hon SHANE JONES: Sir I agree with you. I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: All right. Point of order the Hon Shane Jones. Hon SHANE JONES: I agree with you sir that I have to be judicious in my language but that member is pretty rough and pretty wide and pretty ripe and colourful with his language and if he dishes it out he has to be prepared to accept it. SPEAKER: Yes and one does not reflect on members in the way that that member did then. It is totally inappropriate he knows it's inappropriate and as a result of that we're going to move on to question No. 7.
5. Question No. 5—Economic DevelopmentHon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura) to the Minister for Economic DevelopmentQuestion No. 5—Economic DevelopmentHon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura): Thank you Mr Speaker. To the Minister for Economic Development—with your indulgence Mr Speaker—congratulations to the Minister on his promotion. Does he stand by—SPEAKER: Order! Order! Hon Judith Collins: I asked for indulgence. SPEAKER: I am very tempted to cancel the member's question. I'll think about the punishment as we go on. 5. Hon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura) to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he stand by his 1 April statement That's why we are now developing a pipeline of infrastructure projects from across the country that would be ready to begin as soon as we are able to move around freely and go back to work"? Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister for Economic Development): Yes and that's why the Government has already announced some of this pipeline including the Minister of Housing's public housing construction programme the additional $1 billion for rail announced in the Budget by the Minister for State Owned Enterprises and schools up and down the country with school improvement projects under way and the Minister of Transport informs me that there are more than 40 State highway projects under construction across New Zealand right now. A number of Ministers including the Ministers of transport health and education are continuing work on the projects that were announced in the New Zealand Upgrade Programme. Overall I'm advised that Budget 2020 forecasts around $14 billion in net capital expenditure in the year ended 30 June 2021. Hon Judith Collins: How many if any of the 1924 projects put forward by the Infrastructure Industry Reference Group are shovel-ready right now? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The member would have to ask the Minister of Finance that question because he's leading the assessment and decision-making process around those projects. Hon Judith Collins: Then how many new projects have begun now that we are back at work and able to "move around freely"? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: As I said to the member earlier there is a long long list of projects in the Government pipeline of infrastructure projects including housing and roads and schools and health and rail—far too many to take up all the time of the House recounting. Hon Judith Collins: Then will he table the list? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I'd have to see how long it took to compile it. Because the list is so long it might not be a good use of the House's time. Hon Judith Collins: Do any of the 1924 projects put forward by the Infrastructure Industry Reference Group need the fast-tracking consent in order to proceed and was he thinking of those when he put out his press release on 1 April? Hon PHIL TWYFORD: No I don't believe any of them need the Resource Management Act fast tracking to proceed but many of them will probably benefit from it."
3. Question No. 3—EnvironmentGINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister for the EnvironmentQuestion No. 3—Environment3. GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister for the Environment: How does he propose that fast-track consenting will help the COVID-19 recovery? Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment): Mr Speaker—Mr Speaker? SPEAKER: The Hon David Parker. Hon DAVID PARKER: Thank you Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: Sorry I was just looking for the member—he's got more distant. Hon DAVID PARKER: Oh thank you. I still look the same. The Government's No. 1 economic priority as we recover from the COVID-19 global pandemic is to create and retain jobs for New Zealanders. Over 45000 New Zealanders have lost their jobs as a consequence of the COVID crisis and it is of critical importance that as many New Zealanders as possible can return to the workforce as quickly as possible. The Government plans to introduce special legislation today to support New Zealand's recovery by fast tracking resource consenting and designations so that job-rich projects can gain approval as soon as possible—faster than through the standard Resource Management Act (RMA) process. This will bring forward the construction projects often by months and sometimes by years. This bill helps provide New Zealanders with jobs and incomes and supports the economy to recover from the effects of COVID-19. Ginny Andersen: How will the fast-track legislation work? Hon DAVID PARKER: There are essentially three parts to the fast-track process to speed up projects and bring forward jobs. Firstly there are 11 named projects that are referred directly to an expert consenting panel by Parliament. The panel will set appropriate conditions for the projects before they can proceed. The second track applies to applications for other private or public projects. Applicants must provide information to the Minister for the Environment on how the project meets the criteria specified in the bill—in particular employment. Selected projects will then be referred by Order in Council to panels for consideration. The third aspect is the ability for the New Zealand transport authority and KiwiRail to undertake repair maintenance and minor upgrade works on existing infrastructure and road and rail corridors as permitted activities subject to certain conditions. Ginny Andersen: How will the fast-track legislation ensure that environmental protections are maintained and Treaty of Waitangi commitments are honoured? Hon DAVID PARKER: While extraordinary times such as this require extraordinary measures environmental outcomes ought not to be sacrificed. While these projects are being advanced in time environmental safeguards remain. Part 2 of the RMA including the recognition of matters of national importance will continue to apply. RMA Treaty principles and Treaty settlements will be upheld. Finally the fast-track law is a short-term intervention that will repeal in two years. It's not part of the wider review of the RMA. That comprehensive review led by retired Court of Appeal Judge Tony Randerson QC is expected to report back soon and I expect to release that in the next few weeks.
1. Question No. 1—FinanceTAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of FinanceORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Finance1. TAMATI COFFEY (Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy and our response to COVID-19? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): In its weekly commentary released yesterday Kiwibank economists said that The worst-case scenarios were now off the table as we have wound back social distancing measures much sooner than most economic forecasts and downside scenarios." Not everyone is quite as optimistic as that. The ASB economists noted the New Zealand economy was faring a little better than most expected. The ASB senior economist Jane Turner told the New Zealand Herald that New Zealand's hard and early approach meant a stronger economy over the second half of the year than ASB and other forecasters had initially expected. Our swift and decisive response to COVID-19 has put us in a good position compared to the rest of the world. However the impact on New Zealand from COVID-19 economically will still be significant as the rest of the world struggles with lockdowns and low confidence. Tamati Coffey: What reports has he seen on the international context for the New Zealand economy? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The BNZ economists yesterday described the global outlook as "a gale-force headwind". New Zealand is an outward-facing exporting nation so we will always be affected by any global downturn. The BNZ said given that exports account for almost a third of our GDP the prevalence of COVID-19 across the globe will continue to be a limiting factor on our economic expansion. The Government will continue to cushion the blow for our businesses and workers while we rebuild the economy. Tamati Coffey: What reports has he seen on unemployment as a result of COVID19? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Many economists have revised down their predictions for unemployment on the back of economic activity being better than expected due to our move to level 1. Westpac said on Friday that it expects unemployment to peak at 8 percent not 9.5 percent as originally predicted and the OECD has also picked an unemployment peak of just under 8 percent in its new forecast this week. If we look across the Tasman in Australia the Reserve Bank Governor there has revised his previous 10 percent unemployment forecast down to an 8 percent peak. So we are expected to track along the same lines as Australia when it comes to unemployment. This Government is keeping New Zealand moving through our investments in education and training particularly in trades training and apprenticeships but we must recognise there will be tough times ahead and the Government will continue to support people through that."
Russell DeborahDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn): We heard an extraordinary number of submitters during the select committee stage of this bill. As it turned out all the hearings were recorded and that recording is available so people can see for themselves the truth of how it was conducted. I stand by my chairing of that committee.
Nash StuartPart 1 Amendments to Arms Act 1983Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): Thank you very much Mr Chair. The objective of this legislation is to ensure that firearms do not end up in the hands of bad people of people who would seek to do harm to our citizens and our community to restrict ownership to good law-abiding citizens and who can argue with that?The privilege" clause states that it is a privilege to own a firearm not a right. That is what a fundamental purpose of this bill is about. This legislation will keep guns out of the hands of gangs and will significantly increase penalties for gun crime and I cannot understand why the Opposition would oppose a bill that ensures that gang members and prospects could not get a gun licence. And I cannot understand why the Opposition would not back a bill that significantly increases the penalties for gun crime. I'm assuming we're going to find out why they would oppose this but for the life of me I certainly cannot figure it out.Even though it is not in the bill I want to make one thing perfectly clear: we will set up an independent arms authority to manage this legislation. This was recommended in 1997 by Justice Thorp. Police will still be responsible for enforcement but a separate agency will manage the legislation. So the policy the licensing regime will be managed by an independent authority.I also want to thank New Zealand First in particular Ron Mark and Clayton Mitchell for the hard work put in. We all worked constructively in good faith and I think we have ended up with a piece of legislation which is actually long overdue and I thank Mr Mark for the work that you've put in sir; it has been fantastic. The select committee very ably chaired by Deborah Russell heard submissions without fear or favour and came up with a whole lot of recommendations that again I think make this legislation much more workable and I thank the select committee and I thank the chair Deborah Russell.Finally what I would like to say is that this legislation is long overdue. Perhaps—just perhaps—if we had taken up the recommendations of Justice Thorp in 1997 we would not be here today. As a consequence of that as a consequence of Justice Thorp's foresight a man certainly before his time I want to dedicate this legislation to the former Justice Sir Thomas Thorp. Thank you very much."
Hipkins Chris; Rurawhe AdrianHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Following discussions across the House I seek leave for all of the provisions in the bill to be taken as one debate.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is objection.
SpeechARMS LEGISLATION BILLIn CommitteeCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Tēnā rā tātou katoa. Members the House is in committee on the Arms Legislation Bill. I remind members that the House has agreed to trial the removal of the four-call limit in the committee stage. I encourage you to keep your contributions focused—five minutes is not a target—and relevant to promote good interaction with the Minister in the chair. We have the ability to take short calls and have a series of questions and answers between members and the Minister. You can be confident that you will get a number of short calls. I add that if you yield to the Minister you will get the next call.
Hipkins ChrisSITTINGS OF THE HOUSEHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I move That the sitting of the House today be extended into tomorrow morning for the committee stage of the Arms Legislation Bill the second readings of the Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill and the Land Transport (Rail) Legislation Bill the third readings of the Privacy Bill and the Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission Bill and the second reading of the Public Finance (Wellbeing) Amendment Bill. Motion agreed to.
McAnulty KieranKIERAN McANULTY (Labour): I think we all know that the reason the ACT Party is opposing the bill is because they want to have a two in front of their name when they get to election night. That is a task that's going to be tough because that will involve the total of doubling their support. I think it is a shame that political parties are using this as a platform on which to try to score cheap political points. The other side of the House have said that they'll support it and then spend nine and a half minutes telling us why they don't like it. Well why don't they like this Government? The fact is this bill is necessary. This bill will bring projects forward that will benefit the economy—exactly what the Opposition are calling for this Government to do. Frankly this bill will directly benefit Wairarapa so I've absolutely no reason to oppose it. I commend this bill to the House.
O'Connor DamienHon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister of Agriculture): Thank you Mr Speaker. Look I'm not going to take too long to speak in support of this bill. I'd just like to clarify a few things and I guess the confusion that might be in the minds of some people who may have agonisingly listened to that previous speech. The reality is that the National Government has talked and talked and talked about this Resource Management Act (RMA) all its time in nine years of Government and it did nothing. And what I will say is that my colleague the Hon David Parker has been committed to improve the RMA. This bill is doing that. We walk the talk and National talked the talk and that's about all they will do. The difference between that party and why we couldn't support it is that we cannot trust the National Party with anything even the facts—even the facts. And I would trust David Parker with my life; in fact I have. And I know—[Interruption] I have. In fact I know he will shepherd this bill through to get the right outcomes for New Zealand in a time of need.
Warren-Clark AngieANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a real pleasure to rise. Why do we need this bill? Quite simply we're in extraordinary times and we need to rebuild our economy. What are we not going to do? We're not going to sacrifice the environment in order to get these projects completed. I therefore commend the bill to the House.
Webb DuncanDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā. Thank you Mr Speaker. Look I am gratified and heartened by the fact that Mr Scott Simpson and his party are going to support this bill to select committee because I think there'll be some really good work there. You only have to look at the purpose section of this bill to see that its purpose its function is actually of critical importance at this time and I know that the Environment Committee will work very very hard to get this bill improved to listen carefully to stakeholders and to make sure that it's workable because this is actually about the current crisis. This isn't about the need to review the Resource Management Act which we all accept—and in fact which this Government has started on—it's about ensuring that projects which are ready to go can be undertaken. It's about employment growth and economic growth but the good thing about it really is set out in clause 19 which is about not necessarily the listed projects which have already been examined but the projects which may be referred to this special procedure. It's really important to recognise that it's not a free-for-all; it's a careful process where the Minister will have to consider a number of matters not just economic benefits but—let's be honest in the current situation economic benefits employment and the economic knock-on effects are very important—also the social and cultural wellbeing of the communities and also the environmental impacts including climate change. In terms of these referral projects—the projects which people are essentially invited to put before the Minister for this fast-tracked process—there's a real encouragement that they are projects which have much wider benefits including for example managing natural hazards and including the impact of climate change. So look I'm really looking forward to sitting on the select committee and working cooperatively with the National Party and of course the coalition partners but working through to make this bill ready to get to work before Parliament rises so that these projects can in fact start and the impediments can be swept to one side. We can not only create employment but also improve our infrastructure improve our environment and really improve the lives of many New Zealanders. An excellent bill by David Parker—I commend it to the House.
COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Bill — Introduction
SpeechCOVID-19 RECOVERY (FAST-TRACK CONSENTING) BILLIntroductionBill introduced.
Parker DavidURGENCYHon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment) on behalf of the Leader of the House: I move That urgency be accorded to the introduction first reading and referral to select committee of the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Bill.The use of urgency for the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Bill is to enable it to come before the House today when it would otherwise not have been available until next week. It will be considered by the House entirely within normal sitting hours. Having the bill read the first time provides some time for it to be considered by a select committee. There is however a need to get this bill enacted quickly. It is one of the range of measures that will help to rebuild the economy after the COVID-19 pandemic.The bill identifies 11 infrastructure projects to be fast tracked through the consent process so that they can get going much sooner than would otherwise be possible. I will outline those projects plus some other tracks under the bill in more detail when we discuss that bill but overall it will reduce the duration of consent processes which will enable projects to start significantly earlier than would otherwise be the case.With limited House time available before the election in the view of the Government it's essential that this bill go to select committee now so that it can benefit from urgency which is the House's own fast-track system. Delay until after the election of the passage of this bill would nullify some of its effects and delay a significant boost to the economy post-COVID. I ask the House to support the urgency motion.
Luxton JoJO LUXTON (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to stand and take a short call on this piece of legislation. Can I begin by commending the Hon James Shaw for bring this piece of legislation to the House and shepherding it through. I would just like to finish off by saying everything that I would like to have said has been said and so I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Your time has expired. Thank you. Hon Nathan Guy: Madam Speaker. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): So—Tim van de Molen: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Sorry were you doing a point of order Mr Guy or—I'm confused. Tim van de Molen: I am doing a point of order. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): The clock's on zero but Mr Guy was calling as well. Tim van de Molen: Well I have called a point of order. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Point of order. TIM VAN DE MOLEN (Third Whip—National): Thank you Madam Speaker. The issue we have here is that it was a split call called. Because Mr Strange's contribution was only 15 seconds Mr Guy is entitled to the balance of that time and whilst you had five minutes on the clock actually he is entitled to a full nine minutes and 45 seconds for his contribution. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): What Standing Order is that? TIM VAN DE MOLEN: That's Standing Order 48(3). The last line is of particular relevance: the next speaker gets the balance of the time." ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Can you tell me again what Standing Order you were referring to? TIM VAN DE MOLEN: Sorry it's Speaker's ruling 48/3 by Speaker Mallard in 2017 and Mr Guy has a very comprehensive contribution to continue making in this instance I'm sure. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Your interpretation of it has never been the way that it's been interpreted for my brief time in this House. My reading of both the Speaker's ruling that you refer to and the Standing Order which is Standing Order 121(2) is that that time can be allocated in the way you describe if it's by agreement and you'll know that on contentious issues there is often a 10-minute call split by agreement. That isn't the case. In this instance there's five minutes allocated to each speaker and the Hon Nathan Guy has used up his five minutes. Hon Nathan Guy: Point of order. Tim van de Molen: Madam Speaker—Hon Nathan Guy: A point of order—Tim. Tim van de Molen: —it's very clear—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Could you guys work it out which one's going to call for a point of order? It's too hard for me to choose. TIM VAN DE MOLEN (Third Whip—National): Well thank you Madam Speaker. It is very clear that Speaker Mallard ruled that is the case—the next speaker gets the balance of the time. There is no mention in it whatsoever about a requirement to have agreement on that particular point. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): There is a process for challenging the Speaker's determination and the way that you are doing it is not appropriate. Is there another speaker? Hon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki): I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I seek leave of the House to finish my contribution in the next four minutes and 40 seconds.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is objection. Are there any further speakers?"
Strange JamieJAMIE STRANGE (Labour): What a negative speech over there and I think that highlights why that party is in Opposition and this party is in Government because we're aspirational about the future. I commend this bill to the House.
Craig LizDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's an absolute pleasure to stand in support of this third and final reading of this bill because what this bill does is put in place a comprehensive framework that's going to allow us to meet our targets under the zero carbon Act. So without further delay I commend this bill to the House.
Appropriation (2019/20 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — First Reading
Robertson GrantAPPROPRIATION (2019/20 SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES) BILLFirst ReadingHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I move That the Appropriation (2019/20 Supplementary Estimates) Bill be now read a first time. Bill read a first time.
Speaker's Statements — COVID-19—Acknowledgments
Mallard TrevorTUESDAY 16 JUNE 2020The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Karakia.SPEAKER'S STATEMENTSCOVID-19—AcknowledgmentsSPEAKER: Before I go to general business I just would like to acknowledge the fact that this is the first time the House has sat in its normal form since the beginning of the COVID period. I want to place on record my thanks to all members of Parliament for their tolerance during this time. I want to thank the Leader of the House the shadow Leader of the House and both senior whips for the work that they've done and to acknowledge the COVID committee and the work that it did. I think it's been recognised internationally as doing work that was very important and meant that we had a balance of accountability with safety in a way that I don't think any other country actually managed during this period. I would also like to ask the Clerk of the House and the chief executive of the Parliamentary Service to pass on to staff my thanks for the work that they did during the period. I think that there was especially within electorate offices a lot of new demand and intensive demand which was handled generally very very well. Thank you.
Thursday 4 June 2020 - Volume 746
11. Question No. 11—WomenGARETH HUGHES (Green) to the Minister for WomenQuestion No. 11—Women11. GARETH HUGHES (Green) to the Minister for Women: What has the Government done to address period poverty in schools?Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Minister for Women): Tēnā koutou Mr Speaker. Tēnā koutou e Te Whare. The Government will begin providing free period products to 15 schools in the Waikato following the Government's $2.6 million investment announced yesterday. The roll-out will be expanded to all State and State-integrated schools on an opt-in basis in 2021. Periods are a fact of life for half the population and access to these products is a necessity not a luxury. Gareth Hughes: Is it acceptable in modern New Zealand that according to a KidsCan survey from 2018 one-third of 15- to 17-year-olds who responded said they'd missed school because they didn't have access to period products? Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: No one should miss school because they have had their period and don't have access to the products they need. We know that nearly 95000 nine- to 18-year olds may stay at home during their periods due to not being able to afford period products. By making them freely available we support these young people to continue learning and participating at school. Gareth Hughes: Will reusable products be available and how will this initiative consider the environment? Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: I'm very happy to say that environmental sustainability will be considered in the programme. While the pilot will start with disposable pads and tampons they will be plastic-free and there may be scope to include other types of reusable types of products in the programme in the future if there is high demand for them. Gareth Hughes: Has the Minister seen reports of families choosing food over period products for children and is the Government acting now as part of its focus on child poverty? Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: Yes and no family should have to choose between food and period products in a wealthy country like Aotearoa New Zealand. Ensuring that every schoolchild has the period products they need is another step towards our goal of eliminating child poverty. I'm pleased our Government is finding ways of helping children and young people at a time when every extra bit of assistance makes a difference. I also want to thank the researchers and the campaigners who have highlighted the issue of unaffordability of period products for some families and the subsequent absence from school for some children and young people. This was a win for those campaigners.
10. Question No. 10—PoliceBRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister of PoliceQuestion No. 10—Police10. BRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister of Police: Does he expect that police will enforce the rules relating to the COVID-19 alert levels?Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): I expect police to apply the discretion that they are given under the law when undertaking enforcement activities.Brett Hudson: What advice if any has the Minister requested on the enforcement of the COVID-19 restrictions in relation to a tangi held on 30 April in Dunedin and events in the days leading up to it that saw dozens of patched gang members travel within the district in breach of level 4 conditions? Hon STUART NASH: None. Brett Hudson: Does he believe that this tangi and the events in the nine days leading up to it broke the rules set down to assist New Zealand's COVID-19 response?Hon STUART NASH: It's not what I believe but I do have confidence in the Commissioner of Police to ensure his officers enforce COVID-19—Hon Dr Nick Smith: Soft on gangs.Hon STUART NASH: —sorry Dr Smith?—Hon Dr Nick Smith: Soft on gangs.Hon STUART NASH: —oh turn it up you bloody loser—restrictions appropriately.Brett Hudson: Why are police willing to issue warnings to members of the public for suspected breaches such as having a cup of tea at the end of their respective driveways with neighbours but not gang members who clearly breached COVID-19 rules?Hon STUART NASH: Police have no record of any reports or complaints being made with regard to the incident that the member alluded to.