edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the report be adopted.Ayes 107New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The Organic Products and Production Bill is set down for third reading immediately.
Organic Products and Production Bill — In Committee
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): I really appreciate that explanation. Thank you Minister. The question is that the Minister's amendments to Supplementary Order Paper 262 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 284 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments to the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments to the amendments agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question now is that the Minister's amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 262 as amended be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments as amended be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Amendments as amended agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that the Minister's tabled amendment to clause 125 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 10ACT New Zealand 10.Amendment agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Parts 5 to 8 Schedules 1 and 2 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 10ACT New Zealand National 10.Parts 5 to 8 Schedules 1 and 2 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.Bill to be reported with amendment.
VotePart 3 Imports and exportsCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members we come now to Part 3 which is the debate on clauses 35 to 50 Imports and exports". The question is that Part 3 stand part.The question is that the Minister's amendments to Part 3 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 262 be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 3 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 107New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Part 3 as amended agreed to."
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that the Minister's Part 2 amendments to Supplementary Order Paper 262 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 284 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments to the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Amendments to the amendments agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that the Minister's amendments to Part 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 262 as amended be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments as amended be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Amendments as amended agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The question is that Mark Cameron's amendment to clause 10 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 309 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Noes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 107New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Part 2 as amended agreed to.
VoteCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that the Hon Damien O'Connor's amendments to Part 1 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 262 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Amendments agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that Teanau Tuiono's amendment to clause 3 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 279 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 104New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; ACT New Zealand 9.Amendment not agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that Part 1 as amended stand part. All those in favour say Aye; to the contrary No.Hon Members: Party vote.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Sorry I can't hear the member because she's sitting down and the microphone is not picking her up. Did the member have a point of order or—Brooke van Velden: No. We're party voting no.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you. OK so I haven't called for that. A party vote has been called for. The Clerk will conduct a party vote—apologies to the member.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Voting — Correction—Digital Identity Services Trust Framework Bill
VoteVOTINGCorrection—Digital Identity Services Trust Framework BillDr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Deputy Musterer—Green): Point of order. I seek leave of the House to correct our vote on that last vote.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Are there any objections to that? There are no objections. Please go ahead Dr Elizabeth Kerekere.Dr ELIZABETH KEREKERE: It turns out we're not opposing that bill; we are in favour. So 10 votes in favour on that last vote.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): So then the vote is unanimous on that last bill. Thank you. The Digital Identity Services Trust Framework Bill is set down for third reading immediately.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 103New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; ACT New Zealand 8.Amendment not agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 10 Noes 106.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that Chlöe Swarbrick's amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 261 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to.Ayes 10Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 103New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; ACT New Zealand 8.Amendment not agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 10 Noes 106.Parts 1 to 7 the Schedule and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 105 Noes 10.MAUREEN PUGH (Junior Whip—National): Point of order Madam Chair. We wish to adjust the previous two votes please.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Is there any objection? There is none.MAUREEN PUGH: Can we adjust them to 31 votes please? Thank you.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): So this is for Supplementary Order Papers 260 and 261? OK. So the Ayes are 10 and the Noes are 103. Thank you. I will report this bill with amendment.Bill to be reported with amendment.House resumed.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Madam Speaker the committee has considered the Digital Identity Services Trust Framework Bill and reports it with amendment. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.
SpeechDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise on behalf of the ACT Party for the third and final reading of the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill. I'm happy to say that ACT will continue to support this legislation. First up I'd just like to offer my congratulations once again to the new Minister. I feel like I've been saying that a lot recently; I've got seven shadow portfolios and every single one of them has had a new Minister in recent times. Secondly a big shout-out—very important—to our fire service and front-line firefighters especially for the extraordinary work they do whether it's the response to the cyclone or it could range to things like all the car accidents they attend the home emergencies they attend. Having visited fire stations around the country and spoken to firefighters they tell a lot of very harrowing stories. And obviously they've had a lot of issues with pay and with conditions and with equipment and you know they definitely need more funding and the funding model sorted out which I know is an ongoing discussion. The fire service is funded by an insurance-based levy and we've had a chat about that around whether that's the best way to fund the fire service. I note the Minister said it's still fit for purpose but I hope that we can keep an open mind about that. So this bill—very technical targeted changes to simplify the implementation of the original legislation to reduce costs and the complexity for insurance brokers and companies and that all makes perfect sense. We're happy with that. So a lot of technical changes—physical loss or damage from fire that will need to pay the levy and that the levy will be calculated from the sum insured and things around motor vehicles. This stuff is all totally fine but I think we still do need to focus on the fire service and our fire firefighters because there is a lot there that they need. The scope of their work is just absolutely extraordinary. So they need clarity. This bill provides a little bit. I think the delay in the commencement was never really that well explained and kind of kicks the can down the road a little bit. But none the less we're happy to support this bill. Thank you Mr Speaker.
Tuiono TeanauTEANAU TUIONO (Green): Thank you Mr Speaker. I join with other colleagues around the House in acknowledging the important and amazing work that our first responders do our firefighters do and in particular in the context of the recent intensive weather events. Our position hasn't changed from first reading to second reading to now because there are still unanswered questions larger questions. I do appreciate the sentiments from the Minister in terms of the narrow scope of this bill but there are questions around how we're going to fund Fire and Emergency services.Last year I remember and the Greens remember when we went to visit fire stations across the motu and looked at the state of the gear that they've got to work with the pay and working conditions the state of some of their fire stations as well and the challenges within Fire and Emergency New Zealand itself that there is not only the need to be better in terms of the administration—and my understanding is that this is what this bill will do as well—but you've got to be able to deal with all of those other issues as well and making sure that there is sufficient funding.So yes this bill will bring some efficiencies in trying to align it with best insurance practices and making sure that the administrative inefficiencies are taken out of the system—and I can see that being a good thing—but my concern is and continues to be that by narrowing it just down to fire damage well then what does that mean in terms of the possibility of all that other work that our first responders do—all that other work that our first responders do all the other work that the Fire and Emergency services do?When we introduced this bill in the House all of the efficiency side of it did make sense but we've had intensive weather events—intensive weather events—for our firefighters who were out there they weren't dealing with fires; they were dealing with floods. So yes this bill is narrow and it has to deal with bringing up and weeding out those administrative inefficiencies but there are wider questions here at play that have not been answered about how do we actually properly fund so our firefighters have better working conditions good gear and making sure that there is enough funding because there are more intensive weather events on the way. Climate change is here.So because of those unanswered questions from first reading second reading and today through the committee of the whole House the Greens are unable to support this legislation.
SpeechDr ANAE NERU LEAVASA (Labour—Takanini): Fa'afetai lava Madam Speaker. It is a great privilege to rise as the MP for Takanini to take a brief call on the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill third reading. Again I would like to say a huge fa'afetai lava to the Minister Barbara Edmonds and also the hard-working Governance and Administration Committee for bringing this through the process of the bill. I also want to acknowledge the work that Fire and Emergency NZ—especially our Counties Manukau team—do. We recently had a fire last week which affected five businesses. It was an overnight fire; I saw the video and it was raging out of control. We had nine fire trucks come and two ladder trucks as well. The amount of work that they do—it's dangerous and they put themselves on the line. I just want to acknowledge our Counties Manukau crew for helping out with our Takanini fire last week. I also want to say my thoughts and prayers for one of the staff members who got injured during the fire and who's still recovering in hospital.As you can see we know what the bill will do but ultimately it will bring an efficient levy regime that will benefit the back pockets of everyday New Zealanders and it will also give assurance to our fire and emergency services. It also upholds the funding principles for the levy system—that is to be number one stable; universal; equitable which this new amendment will do; predictable; and also flexible. So that's why I commend this bill to the House.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. I too rise to take a very short call on the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill today. We've heard very great tributes to our Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) people and I add my voice to those and also to the structure that we now have.I recall working with Dame Margaret Bazley as she worked her way through the restructure and for a rural council at the time this was seen as a lifesaver for some of our rural fire parties. But when the original bill was enacted Part 3 which we're discussing today was delayed until 1 July 2024 just to allow the time to understand how this was all going to fall and as a consequence it has been identified that there will be some challenges and complexity with the structure as first proposed.So this bill sets out to clarify that make it simpler and hopefully cheaper. But one of the things that the National Party would like to note is that FENZ's budget has increased dramatically. In fact their estimate was exceeded by $200 million for the current financial year. So we will be very focused on how FENZ manages their expenses and on making sure that front-line staff are not sacrificed in any of those considerations.There is still a transitional phase. This is going to push the enacting of this particular part of the bill out to 2026 so hopefully there are no further fish-hooks recognised and in the next few years we will see this enacted and in place. I commend the bill to the House.
SpeechANGELA ROBERTS (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. It is my pleasure to stand and take a call on the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill. We've already heard that this bill is about making sure that it does what it says on the tin. This is a good bill because of the significant contributions brought to the process by experts and that is a wonderful thing about the progress that we go through with progressing a bill through this House. The bill we have heard is going to make the levy process simpler more efficient and thus cheaper to administer—and that's great news because the levy needs to do what it needs to do which is fund our firefighters. I think it's really interesting—every one of us will have a story in this House of one of those 85000 call outs. We've all got a story a grateful story of where we have been impacted by the significant work that our fire service delivers to us. I can remember waking up in the middle of the night once—I live in the middle of nowhere—but hearing the roofing nails being fired out of the Tariki Tavern was very distressing. For a rural community I think we feel the support from people like our firefighters even more acutely. So it is because of that that I am going to be saying that I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Look I'm pleased to take what will be a relatively short call in this third and final reading. It's been quite a journey to get here. Can I echo many if not all of the thanks which the Minister of Internal Affairs made—so that I don't have to repeat all of them. I think this side of the House is just grateful to those she thanked but it would be remiss not to specifically once again thank our fire service. They do an incredible job at the best of times and certainly at the worst of times which we've seen through these weather events. And as the Minister rightly pointed out two of those crew—David and Craig—lost their lives and so we acknowledge them. And as I mentioned in earlier speeches I think it behoves us as the House to support the service that they undertook in Fire and Emergency New Zealand as best we can. Look as I've said before this is a good bill. I'm not going to run through all the particular changes. The best way for people at home to understand this is that it's trying to align the levy more to insurance practice. So it's trying to make things simpler. New Zealand's in a somewhat unusual not completely but a somewhat unusual position in that we as in the Crown do not—sorry not we; I'm not the Crown—the Government doesn't fund the fire service in the same way it does say the police force. We instead use insurance levies and they in particular are targeted on property. So if you insure your house your motor vehicle your commercial property you are paying a fire levy. That does raise a wider question and it's a bigger challenge that multiple Governments have looked at of: is there a better way of funding? I'm not going to opine on that beyond saying there is a little bit of a disconnect at the moment. Those in the fire service will tell you not only are they attending fires but actually they are doing multiple calls out now particularly into the paramedic space car crashes and otherwise. So what is happening in effect is that a service is being provided very positively by the fire service but not being paid for by those people. So it's probably a conversation for the political parties over the coming years of how we better address this. I suppose there's always a little bit of a habit to stick to what we know. But I want to just reiterate again while I personally sense we could improve the system I don't have the answers. It's probably just something that we need to think about. So with that—and I'm conscious the House has been sitting for a jolly long time—I'm happy to commend the bill to the House.
O'Connor GregCHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Madam Speaker the committee has considered the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill and reports it without amendment. I move That the report be adopted.Motion agreed to.Report adopted.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill is set down for third reading immediately.
Tuiono Teanau; Edmonds BarbaraTEANAU TUIONO (Green): Thank you Mr Chair and I join with other colleagues around the Chamber in congratulating the new Minister of Internal Affairs on her first time as the Minister in the chair. I was wondering if the Minister could give us some reflections in light of the intensive weather events that happened at the beginning of the year. This legislation came to the House and we're passing it and so on and so forth but between then and now we've had some pretty intensive weather events and with the narrowing down of the levy to just fire damage within the context of flooding in particular and I was just wondering in terms of alleviating any concerns or anxiety around that if the Minister had some reflections.Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister of Internal Affairs): Thank you to the member for his question and I always want to acknowledge the people that have been affected by the recent extreme weather events. Having been on the ground in both Napier Auckland and throughout some of the other affected areas I have seen firsthand the impact of it and also the longer recovery that it is to come.In relation to the member's question—and I'm going to narrow it to keep it within the scope of this particular bill—the purpose of this bill is to be able to provide a much more consistent approach in relation to the levying of insurance contracts to ensure that Fire and Emergency New Zealand has the sufficient revenue it needs. Obviously that is something that with extreme weather events any Minister no matter what portfolio they are in needs to be cognisant of. However for this particular bill because it is a levy for insurance contracts there has been no particular attention taken to those extreme weather events. But I think in general we have to make sure there are sufficient funds there for Fire and Emergency New Zealand to do the job that they need to do to respond to the extreme weather events.Clauses 1 to 15 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment.House resumed.
Edmonds BarbaraSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Hey just to acknowledge first the Minister I think in her role as Minister of Internal Affairs—the first time in the chair—to acknowledge that. Look a simple but a technical question—Hon Michael Woodhouse: She's an old hand now.SIMON O'CONNOR: Oh well I won't go easy then—no only kidding. It's around motor vehicles and some submitters have raised the question What is a motor vehicle?" There's some concern that this current drafting might capture the likes of e-scooters e-bikes ride-on lawnmowers and so forth and I know that some submitters to the Governance and Administration Committee—particularly within the insurance realm—were asking "What is a motor vehicle?" and/or "Has the Minister or her officials considered making it very clearly defined?" Because don't get me wrong I pretty much know what a motor vehicle is—cars and trucks—but at the moment there is a concern that this could actually go wider and be including the likes of e-bikes scooters ride-on lawnmowers and so forth which we don't think on this side of the House is what wants to be captured.Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister of Internal Affairs): Thank you to the member for his question. I acknowledge some of the submitters had concerns around the broadening application of this particular bill. I'm advised at the time when officials responded to the Governance and Administration Committee in relation to those submissions there is a definition within the Act; however they did not believe on balance that there was enough of a problem to change the definition. I should probably also point out that a very important part of this is the insurance contract itself so insurers will have their own definition of what a motor vehicle insurance is—so what insurance is for motor vehicle purposes. So on balance there was no need to change the definition and we believe we've struck the right balance.SIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I thank the Minister for that. I suppose the question is ultimately whether she will consider looking into this further; I know there's a wider review. I think one of the concerns that comes out of the insurance industry in particular is the dis-alignment—that's probably bad English—between their rules understandings and definitions and what we use in legislation and the sort of raison d'être of this amendment is to try and align things a little bit more to what the insurers understand things so it's smoother simpler. Is she open to considering defining further so that actually what is levied does align more clearly with the definitions if you will of the insurance industry?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister of Internal Affairs): Thank you to the member for his question. At this time on balance—given the submissions given the Governance and Administration Committee review and given the advice I've received from officials—no but however obviously always in future I'm open to looking at—if there are further calls and once the legislation is put through once the regulations are put through if there is a need to amend in the future I will of course be open at that time."
Edmonds BarbaraHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Minister of Internal Affairs): Thank you Mr Chair. Just some brief notes in relation to this particular stage of the bill before we go into answering questions.Fire and Emergency New Zealand provides critical services for our community. The Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill will ensure we have a fit for purpose funding model to enable Fire and Emergency to deliver this role in the future. Fire and Emergency receives 97 percent of its funding from a levy on insurance contracts. The Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 outlines the framework for a new levy system that will provide a secure and predictable source of funding that can adopt to changing needs and priorities over time. It will also be as fair as possible and ensure that all those who benefit from the potential to use fire and emergency services contribute to its funding. The Act sets out the types of insurance contracts that must pay the levy and specifies the value of property to be used as the basis for calculating this levy. This bill makes important changes to these features to ensure the levy is simple to implement to minimise disruption and compliance costs while remaining aligned to the levy principles in section 80 of the Act.The bill means only property insured against physical loss or damage from fire will be levied instead of property insured against any physical loss or damage. Additionally the levy will be calculated using the sum insured an insurance contract rather than the term amount insured. These two changes will clarify which insurance arrangements are meant to pay the levy avoiding potentially complex calculations and stopping some property being charged twice. These changes are more closely aligned with insurance practice and terminology and increase the likelihood that the system will be consistently applied. The bill also amends the starting date of the new levy system to 1 July 2026. This is needed as COVID-19 delayed how quickly the Government could progress a review of Fire and Emergency's funding model and develop this legislation. Additionally this change provides enough time for regulations to be set and for the insurance sector to update their systems to calculate and collect the new levy once the regulations have been finalised. Finally the bill makes a minor drafting change to ensure third-party motor vehicle insurers pay the levy. This was the original intent of the Act.
O'Connor Greg; Belich CamillaFIRE AND EMERGENCY NEW ZEALAND (LEVY) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeClauses 1 to 15CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Members we come now to the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill. We come first to clause 1. The question is that clause 1 be agreed to.CAMILLA BELICH (Junior Whip—Labour): Point of order. I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Is there any objection to that? There is no objection. The question is that clauses 1 to 15 stand part.
SpeechASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill.
Chhour KarenKAREN CHHOUR (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to stand on behalf of ACT and speak to the Organic Products and Production Bill. I'd just like to just voice our concern and disappointment in the voting down of the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) in Mark Cameron's name SOP 309. Our concern is around this one-size-fits-all policy that doesn't allow for the discretion for smaller businesses. The SOP was seeking clarity for the smaller operators the farmers the growers in the organics markets place and especially to those who are just selling in the weekend or selling their excess products just to get a little bit of extra money to get by. And whilst we are in a cost of living crisis at the moment where people are struggling for the basics and people are trying to just make a little bit extra or go that little extra mile to make their life a little bit more comfortable we feel that this one-size-fits-all approach goes against these smaller players.Whilst I appreciate the Minister gave some explanation and appreciated our concern around this and said that he didn't feel it was the intention of the bill to capture those people the clarity just wasn't there. And so the SOP was to seek clarity around that for these suppliers. So we appreciate that a convention around the certification that is internationally recognised in organic product space is necessary for some in the industry moving forward—for example organics exporters and large commercial operators. But the bureaucracy and the added cost to smaller organic producers would arguably outweigh many of the benefits if not all of going to those Saturday morning markets or their neighbourhood markets.The ACT Party always feels that somebody should stand up for the small-business owners and be there and be their voice. That's what we've been doing and that's what we will continue to do. So whether it's for the farmer or rural communities or equality in the urban-centric environment lens small to medium sized enterprises we will always try to stand up for the smaller business. We think the SOP struck the needed balance to address the disparities that we were worried about within this bill.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! I'm just going to ask the member at this third reading it is not the time to traverse in depth either matters that were raised at the committee of the whole House stage or what another party might do in the place of this bill.KAREN CHHOUR: Well allowing for greater access to global markets and big producers and making surety for smaller businesses is what we were looking to do.So in the end we saw that we just couldn't have the confidence that this would work for everybody. That's why ACT cannot support this bill in the third reading. We believe it doesn't strike the balance between the large commercialised operators in the industry and the mum and dad farmers and growers that often just supply them to make a little bit extra in the weekends. So ACT just can't support this bill.
SpeechANGELA ROBERTS (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. The pressure is on to come up with some peachy little produce pun. I'll leave that there. It is a great pleasure to rise and take a call on this third reading. It's already been noted that this thing's been around longer than some of us in this House and that it's a worthy bill to be getting through. I just want to note that this bill is about supporting producers and consumers who are trying to build a thriving and sustainable future. A little shout-out: part of the electorate that I live in is a hotbed of organic producers—in Raglan—and they are leading the world. We've got exporters in Raglan like the Raglan Food Company.Barbara Kuriger: That's right.ANGELA ROBERTS: Yep Barbara and I you know we've enjoyed their yoghurt. They are doing the right thing they are world class in their standards they're living wage employers all sorts of things like that and they're being protected by this bill and supported to do the right thing. Consumer confidence; being able to have a register where we can go and be better informed so that we can make great decisions about supporting these producers. We've heard about how important organics are becoming in our global story as exporters and we have to make sure that in such a rapidly growing environment we've got the structures in place so that they can go in confidence to the world. And we're supporting them to do that; it's a wonderful thing. So it's great to hear the recognition of the concerns of my neighbours who sell me my produce on a Sunday morning at the local farmers market. It sounds like you know we've really been able to address those concerns and it means that we can really look after consumers and producers to be sustainable. That's an exciting place to be. I commend this bill to the House.
van de Molen TimTIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to take a call here in the final reading of the Organic Products and Production Bill. Look we've heard some of the nuts and bolts about it. For me ultimately it's about having greater confidence for consumers here in New Zealand but also internationally when we rely so heavily on exporting our fantastic food and fibre products. This is a significant opportunity for us to enhance our reputation in the market to give greater confidence to those consumers and so of course it's appropriate to take that where we can with the caveat to that being what the potential cost is to implement it and the impact it may have on participants within the organics industry. So look on the balance of it that is a concern of mine but I think we have managed to mitigate that risk and the concerns particularly around exemptions for the local farmers market. I think that is in a pretty good place and acknowledging the Minister's comments as well—there were some terrible puns there. But for the farmers markets we just have to make sure that they're not getting in a pickle and coming up with any difficult situations. So I think we've created a way to get them out of a jam and enable them to get on and meet the needs of what they are trying to do. So hopefully they won't have any beef with us and we'll just be able to get on with passing this legislation. I seem to be getting lambasted with comments across the House now but—Hon Dr David Clark: There's going to be egg on your face. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Stop it! TIM VAN DE MOLEN: —ultimately—oh the egg on a face. Well I was going to come up with some egg jokes—yolks—but I couldn't really think of any. But anyway I know I'm cracking you up. Right I think that's just about enough. It's the will of the industry here to get on with this bill so I don't think we need to hold it up any more. Hon James Shaw: Milk it. TIM VAN DE MOLEN: Perhaps I am milking it—yes—but ultimately it's a good piece of legislation. It's appropriate to bring this forward for a critical part of our food and fibre sector. We want to enhance that where we can. It's a good opportunity of course. The caveat remains around the regulatory aspect and the detail coming out there so we need to make sure that industry is included with that to get the right outcome for them. Thank you Madam Chair.
SpeechDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour): It's my pleasure to take a call on the Organic Products and Production Bill. The bill will create consistency for making organic claims and increase consumer confidence by enabling mandatory requirements for any product represented as organic. Requiring businesses who make organic claims to meet a consistent organic standard and be approved by a relevant ministry will ensure our domestic consumers and trading partners that our system is robust. The Organic Products and Production Bill establishes a basis for mandatory organic standards in New Zealand and this will increase consumer confidence in purchasing organic products increase certainty for businesses making organic claims and facilitate international trade of organic products. The bill establishes standards for organic products and production and introduces a way to monitor compliance with these standards. It will set out a framework for the organic system and regulations and it will set out what organic businesses need to do in order for their products to become organic.Currently certification agencies provide a verification and assessment service as well as a final peer review of all paperwork and processes for a business before issuing certification. Under the bill the relevant ministry will undertake this final peer review step and give approval. All other verification and assessment activities will remain the role of recognised entities very similar to the current practice.Some might be asking Why is the term 'organic' not defined in the bill?" The bill as introduced did not have a definition for "organic product". However to reduce the confusion over what "organic" is the Primary Production Committee amended the bill to define an organic product as a product that was produced by an operator in compliance with the relevant standard. The Supplementary Order Paper rephrases this for clarity but the definition of organic remains linked to the standard. This bill aims to increase consumer confidence when purchasing organic products and allow businesses to assert certifiable organic production both domestically and internationally. The bill brings New Zealand practices in line with the way that our major trading partners already regulate organic products and this will assist us in growing our organic industry exports currently estimated at around $500 million per year. For that reason I commend the bill to the House."
Salesa JennyHouse resumed.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The committee has considered the Organic Products and Production Bill and reports it with amendment. I move That the report be adopted.
Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment): I have great sympathy for the people in the gallery who must be wondering what a boring place this is. So I thought I would take a very brief call to explain what we're doing. We have an organics industry in New Zealand which is expanding and has trouble selling products overseas and to some jurisdictions because they don't recognise organic standards so we're introducing a regime that enables our exporters as well as New Zealand consumers to be able to rely upon claims to organics. And the only comment I would make in order to bring this within the Standing Orders as I make this contribution is that one of the parts that we're approving now is the ability to make regulations. Those regulations are effectively food standards and standards for what goes into an organic product how it's produced. Interestingly New Zealand is probably the best at developing standards for food production and exports in the world—born of the fact that we're so distant from world markets and that we've had to develop standards for refrigerated meat for a lot of perishable products that we sell to the other side of the world. We've had to do that both to get it there safely but also to meet the requirements of other countries which are sometimes unfairly strict in order to try and block our exports into those countries. But as a consequence of our need to meet those imperatives we've become very good at that and this is another example of that. There are lots of checks and balances before those regulations can be imposed including consultation with the industry at two stages in the process to make sure that when those regulations are necessary they're fit for purpose.
Salesa Jenny; Belich CamillaParts 5 to 8 Schedules 1 and 2 and clauses 1 and 2CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members we come now to Part 5 which is the debate on clauses 60 to 104—CAMILLA BELICH (Junior Whip—Labour): Point of order. I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Is there any objection to that? There are no objections. The question is that Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8 and Schedule 1 Schedule 2 and clauses 1 and 2 stand part.
Salesa JennyPart 4 Cost recoveryCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members we come now to Part 4 which is the debate on clauses 51 to 59A Cost recovery". The question is that Part 4 stand part.The question is that the Hon Damien O'Connor's amendments to Part 4 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 262 be agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.Ayes 105New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Noes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Amendments agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 4 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 107New Zealand Labour 64; New Zealand National 31; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 9ACT New Zealand 9.Part 4 as amended agreed to."
Chhour Karen; Parker DavidPart 2 Approval and recognitionCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members we come now to Part 2 which is the debate on clauses 8 to 44A Approval and recognition". The question is that Part 2 stand part.KAREN CHHOUR (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. I'd just like to take a moment to speak to Supplementary Order Paper 309 in my colleague Mark Cameron's name. It's in regards to who must or may be approved as an operator and I know you've spoken to this just before but I just urge the Minister in the chair David Parker to take on board the concerns that were expressed for small operators that may just be selling products only to local markets or to substitute their income in some way like neighbourhood markets or farmers markets. They're going to get caught up in this regulation and red tape which may cause it to no longer be viable for them to continue to do so at the local markets in the weekend.My colleague Mark Cameron spoke to me about a retired couple that he had spoken to that had a few extra cucumbers left over at the end of what they'd been growing and so they took them down to the local markets to kind of substitute their income their retirement income to have a better quality of life. This legislation may cause them to reconsider that. There are many people that are just small players in the market—not selling to shops and things like that not exporting overseas—that will get caught up in this. At a time when we're in a cost of living crisis and people are just trying to get by do we really think that it's necessary to have a one-size-fits-all policy that affects these small players? Thank you Minister.Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment): The member raises a fair point. I don't think the intention is that those people be regulated. The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) advised that the bill already includes provisions which enable classes of operators to be exempt from the requirement to be approved as an operator. The proposed regulations that MPI is developing under the bill do recognise that the costs of approval can be disproportionate for the small businesses that the member describes and therefore a class exemption—they wouldn't have to apply for an exemption; the regulations are expected to come through with a class exemption from the requirement to be approved as an operator for the business. One of the reasons that MPI considers that's the more appropriate route for an exemption to sit in regulations is it enables other things to be put round it that we might not be able to contemplate with a general exemption provision such as that which is proposed by Mr Cameron. But I accept the concern behind it which is reflected in the comments that I've made."
Kuriger Barbara; Parker DavidBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki-King Country): Thank you Madam Chair. It's very good to have the organic products bill finally back in the House. I think I was sitting where you were last time we were discussing it during urgency. I just have one question for the Minister as a lot of work we did on this was actually in the last Parliament but related to the fact that our exporting organic people have lots of checks and balances in that process—there was quite a concern around our small organic producers' costs in terms of complying with standards and things. I'm talking about farmers markets and small growers and people like that. I just wanted to ask the Minister if you're certain that we've got the balance right there in terms of protecting I guess those start-up organic producers—making sure they're doing it well but not being over-burdened by compliance.Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment): Thank you. That's a very fair question and it also goes to the heart of a Supplementary Order Paper that is in the name of Mr Cameron from the ACT Party. We recognise that in respect of small organic producers for the likes of farmers markets those businesses won't be able to go through a certification regime. The Ministry for Primary Industries believes that that's best dealt with through the way in which regulations are promulgated when standards are set for who must do what and who should be certified in order to meet the requirements of the legislation. So they think that it's best dealt with at that level where there can be some protections put around exemptions perhaps if necessary rather than having a general carve-out in the primary legislation.
SpeechORGANIC PRODUCTS AND PRODUCTION BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed from 25 November 2022.Part 1 Preliminary provisions and Schedule 1 (continued)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members the House is in committee on the Organic Products and Production Bill. When we were last considering the bill we were debating Part 1 which is the debate on clauses 3 to 7 and Schedule 1 preliminary provisions. The question is that Part 1 stand part.
Digital Identity Services Trust Framework Bill — Third Reading