edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Woodhouse MichaelHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): In the spirit of the theme of the introduction of the speeches on this bill I can only say: Pall Mall filter and Holden Special station wagon. Unlike the previous speaker who's just resumed his seat the very good Mr Eagle my exposure to and subsequent taking up of cigarette smoking probably stunted my growth—it didn't appear to have too much of a negative impact on that speaker.Look I am a little bit conflicted on this piece of legislation. Good legislation requires two things certainly for a party to support it. One: the evidence is there that the bill will make a difference and I'll touch on that but I think there is a deeper philosophical question here about the degree to which the sovereignty of the State ends and the sovereignty of the family begins. This is a really difficult one because what we are talking about is the health of children. Normally I and my colleagues would be very reluctant for the State to enter into the realm of the family to say in those areas that are the domain of the family the assets owned by the family—and the two biggest assets of most families in New Zealand are the house and the car. That's where the State's intervention should end.I'm not even sure my colleague the Hon Nicky Wagner disclosed the National Party's position on this but there is no doubt that we mulled for a considerable period of time over this particular piece of legislation before deciding that we will support the bill at first reading. I look forward to it coming to the Health Committee because I think there are a number of really important questions about the degree to which the way the bill is written is going to have the effect that Mr Eagle just described at the end welcoming the bill because it's going to result in the end of people smoking in cars. Oh were we a society that was that compliant with laws like this because we never said that about the use of cellphones in cars and indeed while we saw a material drop immediately after the bill was passed into the law we did actually see an uptick and an uncomfortably high number of people who are still distracted by devices in their cars. That was another philosophical question about whether safety should override the sovereignty of an individual to do what he or she likes in those things.Nevertheless—and I will continue this after the adjournment—I think there are some merits to this. I will talk about them next week.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 6 p.m.
Allan KiritapuTAXATION (ANNUAL RATES FOR 2019–20 GST OFFSHORE SUPPLIER REGISTRATION AND REMEDIAL MATTERS) BILLThird ReadingDebate resumed from 19 June 2019.KIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour): Well I'd be absolutely remiss if I didn't give it my best nudge with the one minute and 45 seconds that I have left to speak on the Taxation dot dot dot" GST Offshore Supplier Registration Bill. Yesterday I spoke about the long-term problems that we're facing as a country and how we're tackling them. In particular I spoke about how this bill was addressing that through housing. I talked about how we are getting rid of the ability of speculators to ring-fence their losses. Then I talked about how we are committed to building a strong economy and how this bill here does just that—it does that by supporting small business. Then I said how we are focused on wellbeing. Now there are a whole range of factors that this bill does to ensure the wellbeing of a whole range of different sectors within our communities and our society. But in particular I referenced the rather niche aspect within this bill—which is around protecting those that have been sexually violated. It gives the discretion to the IRD commissioner to be able to grant an exemption to those people that must pay child support.There was one final thing that I really wanted to turn my mind to and that was that we are building a New Zealand that we can all be proud of—and this bill does just that. It formalises a process that has been relatively in place for the last 20 or so years but it actually legitimises the way that people can keep their records in Te Reo Māori. Now Te Reo Māori is an official language of this nation. My colleague Willow-Jean Prime spoke to this far more eloquently than I can in the last seven seconds. But what a fantastic bill and I commend it thoroughly to the House."
Racing Reform Bill — Third Reading
Points of Order — Question No. 8 to Minister
Peters WinstonRACING REFORM BILLThird ReadingRt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Minister for Racing): I move That the Racing Reform Bill be now read a third time.This Government would like to thank the following people and organisations who have been instrumental in the development and passage of this bill: first the Transport and Infrastructure Committee for their time and effort in considering the bill including those MPs and political parties who have constructively engaged in the preparation of the legislation; second the many submitters that considered and subsequently contributed to the strengthening of this bill; third the officials who provided advice throughout its development; fourth Mr John Messara for laying out the blueprint for these reforms and the ministerial advisory committee for their work in guiding the implementation of Mr Messara's recommendations; and fifth and finally the New Zealand racing industry for their enthusiasm and support.This bill lays the foundation for a wider set of reforms that are focused on delivering a New Zealand racing industry that is financially sustainable internationally recognised and competitive. This bill puts the New Zealand racing industry into transition so that the necessary changes are set up for a desirable future. The New Zealand Racing Board is reconstituted as the Racing Industry Transition Agency—or RITA—and RITA has a new membership and a legislative mandate that encompasses change management as well as business functions and powers.This bill also addresses the industry's immediate need for supplementary revenue to ensure long-term financial sustainability. It does this by implementing two offshore charges: an information-use charge and a point of consumption charge phasing out the totalisator duty and returning this revenue back to the industry while retaining a portion for harm minimisation. This bill will enable RITA to offer better betting products on sports not represented by a qualifying domestic national sporting organisation where an agreement is reached with Sport New Zealand. It also places the formula for distributing payments to sporting and racing codes into regulations so they can be more readily changed when this is needed in the future.The revitalisation of this industry is under way but this is a first step. As mentioned before this Government intends to introduce a second bill later this year that will build on these initial reforms. This second bill will implement remaining Messara recommendations approved by Government establish post-transition governance arrangements and many other changes deemed necessary to ensure the revitalisation of this industry. As a whole these reforms serve to emphasise the value of racing to the New Zealand economy to employment and to society. The Racing Reform Bill lays out an opportunity to deliver real results to grow this industry for the benefit of our regions our communities and our economy. We're going to make racing great again in our country. Like KiwiRail racing is back on track. Thank you.
Wood MichaelMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): I move That this debate be now adjourned. Motion agreed to.
Hipkins Chris; Woodhouse MichaelTHURSDAY 20 JUNE 2019The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): Next week the Budget debate will conclude. Other legislation to be considered will include the remaining stages of the Appropriation (2018/19 Supplementary Estimates) Bill and the passing of the associated Imprest Supply Bill and the first readings of the Farm Debt Mediation Bill (No 2) and the Maritime Transport (Offshore Installations) Amendment Bill. Wednesday 25 June will be a members' day.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): I thank the Leader of the House for the update and would ask when the Government intends to progress the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Bill which is on the Order Paper having been reported from the Health Committee 13 months ago.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): In the fullness of time and at the appropriate moment. It is not on the plan for the next sitting block but I'll certainly let the member know when it is.
Wednesday 19 June 2019 - Volume 739
Racing Reform Bill — In Committee
VoteNew Part 3 Certain ExemptionsCHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): The amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 253 in the name of Chris Bishop inserting new Part 3 is out of order because it is outside the scope of the bill.Schedule 1Amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 249 in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters to Schedule 1 be agreed to.Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.Schedule 2 agreed to.Schedule 3Amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 249 in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters to Schedule 3 be agreed to.Schedule 3 as amended agreed to.Clause 1 agreed to.Clause 2 agreed to.House resumed.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.
VoteThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 249 in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters to Part 1 be agreed to.Amendment agreed to.Part 1 as amended agreed to.Part 2 Racing Industry Transition Agency The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters to clause 28(4) be agreed to: In clause 28(4) delete paragraph (a)".Amendment agreed to.Part 2 as amended agreed to."
11. Question No. 11—JusticeDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of JusticeQuestion No. 11—Justice11. Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of Justice: What reports has he seen on trends in the Family Court since 2014?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Justice): I have seen reports on trends in the family justice system that show that the number of without notice applications in relation to Care of Children Act claims has increased from 30 percent before the Judith Collins reforms were enacted in 2014 to now 70 percent that number being achieved shortly after the implementation of the reforms and has been sustained ever since. What that means is that more families trying to get their disputes resolved are waiting longer and it's becoming more complex as a result.Dr Duncan Webb: Did the 2014 reforms reduce the time taken to dispose of applications?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: No; in fact quite the opposite. The effect of the reforms championed by Judith Collins now means that the average time it takes for a care of children claim to be resolved is just shy of one year. That is a considerable growth in time compared to the period before Judith Collins enacted her reforms.Dr Duncan Webb: Did the 2014 reforms reduce lawyer for the child costs?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Regrettably I have to report to the House no. There was a slight reduction in costs just after Judith Collins enacted her reforms but that has not been sustained and in fact we are now meeting the same costs as was the situation before those reforms were implemented. What that means now is the taxpayer is paying for a family justice system that is slower for families costing the same with more distress for families. It simply is not working.
10. Question No. 10—PoliceCHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South) to the Minister of PoliceQuestion No. 10—Police10. CHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South) to the Minister of Police: Does he stand by all his statements policies and actions?Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): Yes including calling that member out when he publicly disrespects the fine men and women of the New Zealand Police service and then misleads Parliament on such matters.Chris Bishop: Feeling the heat. Why have only 472—Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Yesterday during question time a member made a remark at the beginning of their question on this side of the House with an open microphone and you prevented them from asking any more than one further supplementary question as a result of that.SPEAKER: Well I missed it; probably because of the interjections that were coming from my left. I'll get the member to start again.Chris Bishop: Why have only 472 new police been added to the force in the last two years and does he accept that he will not reach his target of 1800 new police in three years?Hon STUART NASH: What I can report is that this year a record number of officers have graduated from the Royal New Zealand Police College—831. That is a record that surpassed the 683 who graduated in 1997-98. This financial year we'll be graduating 900 officers and since we have been in Government there have been 1367 new officers heading out into communities.Chris Bishop: Is it still his target to have 1800 new police in the force by the end of next year and given that only 472 have been added so far is he getting ready to reset the target?Hon STUART NASH: It's more than 472 but what I would like to inform the House is I remember reading an official police document in 2016 which highlighted there would be no more police under that Government until 2020.Chris Bishop: Why does he think he's on track to meet the 1800 new police in three years target when according to the Police News the number of new police has actually gone backwards in the last three months?Hon STUART NASH: That's not correct. As mentioned there have been 1367 more police headed out into our communities under this Government. Next year we are planning on training 900 more police into our communities. One thing I can say is we have no control over attrition. But the other thing I can say is that there are a hell of a lot more police heading out into communities than there ever would've been under that Government.
8. Question No. 8—Sport and RecreationJAMIE STRANGE (Labour) to the Minister for Sport and RecreationQuestion No. 8—Sport and Recreation8. JAMIE STRANGE (Labour) to the Minister for Sport and Recreation: What will be delivered through the Healthy Active Learning initiative in Budget 2019 and how is its development representative of the Wellbeing Budget process?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister for Sport and Recreation): The Healthy Active Learning initiative provides $47.6 million of funding for targeted school physical activity advisers health promotion staff and new curriculum resources and guidance for all schools early learning services and kura. This is an excellent example of the wellbeing approach taken in Budget 2019. The initiative was developed together between the Minister of Health the Minister of Education and the Minister for Sport and Recreation with wise advice from the Minister of Finance to support the Budget's priority to improve child wellbeing.Jamie Strange: What evidence was used to inform the development of this initiative? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Evidence shows that physically active children are more likely to have better physical and mental health engage more in the classroom with better attention and ability to stay on task stay in school longer and achieve better academically. Sport New Zealand's latest Active New Zealand Survey found that only 7 percent of young people aged five to 18 were meeting the New Zealand guidelines for physical activity through sport exercise and active recreation. Giving teachers the tools to turn this around will help improve child wellbeing and promote healthy development. Jamie Strange: How will the Healthy Active Learning initiative be rolled out? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The physical activity workforce will be supported by Sport New Zealand and delivered through the network of regional sports trusts. The health promotion workforce will be employed and trained by December 2019 to commence work with schools and early learning services in December 2019. The ministries of health and education will produce a range of resources and tools across the programme for use in schools.
5. Question No. 5—CorrectionsWILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of CorrectionsQuestion No. 5—Corrections5. WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of Corrections: What recent announcements has he made about improving mental health services inside prisons?Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister of Corrections): More good Wellbeing Budget has provided a $128.3 million boost in mental health and addiction services for offenders. This shows the Government's commitment to doing things differently to break the cycle of offending and to keep communities safe. The investment will enable more people to access better mental health and alcohol and other drug services both in prisons and in the community.Willow-Jean Prime: How many additional offenders will receive mental health services because of this wellbeing investment?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Once fully implemented the expanded mental health services will support up to 2310 additional offenders with mild to moderate mental health needs per year. If we support people struggling with mental health or addiction issues we make it easier for them to engage in education employment and rehabilitation activities and develop positive relationships with whānau and support networks. That means they can get their lives back on the right track.Willow-Jean Prime: How will this increase in mental health services help offenders successfully transition from prison back into communities?Hon KELVIN DAVIS: This funding reaches out beyond the wire to help prisoners successfully transition back into their communities. It will provide supported living accommodation for up to 30 offenders with intensive mental health needs as well as provide extra aftercare support services for those dealing with alcohol and drug addictions. This funding also looks to provide support to the whānau of offenders. A whānau service will support 275 families of offenders who need mental health services. Expanded social worker and trauma counselling services will help up to 800 whānau and children reconnect with prisoners. All of these wellbeing initiatives will help ensure those that leave prison will get the support they need to never come back.
4. Question No. 4—FinanceHon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 4—Finance4. Hon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all of the Government's decisions statements and actions in relation to his portfolio?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Yes in the context in which they were made and undertaken.Hon Amy Adams: Does he stand by his statement yesterday in relation to the Government's decision to spend $7 million on Artists in Schools but not reinstate the $6.5 million for cochlear implants that These things are not trade-offs one against another."?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I do. The member is creating a series of false equivalences across the Budget. What I would note is that the baseline funding of $8.43 million for cochlear implants was maintained in this year's Budget.Hon Amy Adams: Does the Minister of Finance responsible for allocating billions of dollars in tax revenue each year seriously not understand the basic economic concept that there are trade-offs when you spend taxpayers' money and that $1 spent on Artists in Schools for example is a dollar that cannot be spent elsewhere? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I have a great deal of awareness of the process of putting together Budgets having now done it twice and one of the things I know is that the trade-off that the National Party made to give tax cuts to people who didn't need them versus not investing in the health system of New Zealand was clearly a decision of their priorities.Hon Amy Adams: So does he understand that if a household for example spends $50 a week extra in rent then that's $50 it doesn't have to spend on things like groceries and why does he think it's any different for this Government?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well clearly rents do go up from time to time. They did under the last Government; they have gone up under this Government. The good news is that for 384000 low and middle income New Zealand families they're going to be better off by $75 a week as a result of the changes that this Government has made.Hon Amy Adams: What responsibility will the Minister take for New Zealand being in "a period of slow-down" as he told the select committee this morning when our terms of trade have been enjoying a period of considerable strength or will he continue to point to future forecasts to explain our already happened slow-down?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We did traverse this material in the select committee. The New Zealand economy is still growing. The rate of growth of that is slower than it was. That is a result of the fact that New Zealand as a country that trades into the world is not immune from what happens in the world. But the good news is—the good news is—that net debt's under control we've got a Budget surplus unemployment's low and yes exports have been growing. The member needs to be just a little bit more glass half-full.Hon Amy Adams: Why? There's nothing to be cheerful about.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: That is so true where you are!Hon Amy Adams: You're breaking the economy Grant. It's no reason to cheer.SPEAKER: I think that shows the point of not interjecting at that particular point of time."
Veterans' Support Amendment Bill — Third Reading
Mark RonThird ReadingHon RON MARK (Minister for Veterans): I move That the Veterans' Support Amendment Bill be now read a third time. Bill read a third time.
Veterans' Support Amendment Bill — Second Reading
van de Molen TimTIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'd like to start by acknowledging all of those veterans that have provided such a wonderful service to New Zealand and in particular to all members who have served in the New Zealand Defence Force. In tonight's context I'd particularly like to acknowledge my colleague and friend Chris Penk MP for Helensville for his service to both the New Zealand Defence Force and the Australian Defence Force and indeed the current defence Minister for his service as well.Now the amendment here to section 9 of the Act clarifies as we've heard the drafting error that could potentially have excluded previous deployments from being captured by this legislation passed in 2014. Now one of the aspects that I particularly wanted to touch on in my brief contribution—I had been approached by a constituent who'd raised concern around the ability for people who had been involved with deployments prior to 1974 to be captured under this and whether indeed there should've been additional scope under this piece of legislation to look at making some adjustments to those classifications as well. We've heard some previous comments around that in terms of the qualifying operational service being able to capture that time period. I think the concern as I understood it was that for some of those earlier deployments it was the definition that was used and therefore the entitlements that were available so to qualify in routine service prior to 1974 had a different set of entitlements to what we are now considering would be available to veterans as qualifying operational service. So the concern there was that that provided a different level for veterans who had effectively performed or provided the same service to our country.But it was encouraging to hear that the Social Services and Community Committee looked into that and sought advice from officials who had confidence that this actually did allow for the Chief of Defence Force to provide a recommendation to the Minister to then make acknowledgments of those operational service deployments prior to that date irrespective of the fact that they may already be covered under a qualifying routine service for example. So that hopefully allays those concerns that were raised by some veterans and former members of the New Zealand Defence Force.So look I see no need to continue to extend this. It's great to see that we are putting this through in a reasonably hasty process and whilst I have hesitation at recommending that as a standard within this House—we have seen it used in a number of instances where it wasn't appropriate but this certainly is for a relatively minor technical change which will recognise appropriately the service of those veterans to our country. So I commend the bill to the House.
Loheni AgnesAGNES LOHENI (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. It is with humility that I stand in support of the Veterans' Support Amendment Bill. This is a short call but that is in no way a reflection of the importance of this bill. It is with immense pride and humility that I look on the efforts and the bravery and the sacrifices made by our veterans that enable me to stand for you today. It is with equal pride that I think of the Samoan Tongan Niuean and Cook Islanders who joined our New Zealand contingents in putting their lives on the line for the freedoms we enjoy today. Many of them have been rightly recognised with veterans support for their service to our country and for veterans of subsequent deployments the purpose of the 2014 Act was to give qualifying operational servicemen and women access to the entitlements the Act intended to deliver. Unfortunately the tight wording of section 9 of the Veterans' Support Act 2014 saw a number of service people excluded for their historical deployments to operational service particularly where the definition of operational service has been clarified by the current Act to cover a range of operational and environmental threats including non-State actors and security forces.I've been heartened by the contributions from both sides of the House today and I believe that this amendment bill will enable consideration of pre-2014 deployments for those who have put themselves in harm's way for our security and for the betterment of the world we live in. In one submission that I just had a quick look at earlier today just a short submission from Mark Treadgold: I think … this is a great improvement in the way we look after … men and women who serve our country."—short but it actually is what this bill is about. I commend this bill to the House.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. I just say to the member because she is new we have been careful to not criticise her for reading her speeches but the time will come shortly where you will be as you get more confidence."
SpeechHon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I just wish to correct the record. The National Party member of Parliament who accompanied me was Barbara Kruger—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Kuriger.Hon RON MARK: —Kuriger—who's the MP for Taranaki - King Country who was the person accompanying me at the Te Awamutu commemorations.
O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I've decided to be very nice to the Hon Ruth Dyson tonight and make this a very short call both in honour of your good self but also there's such comity in the House. The Minister unfortunately stole my lines which was to acknowledge actually the wreaths and ferns around the House. I often tell visitors from my electorate or friends and family visiting that this Chamber is not only a house of Parliament but actually a war memorial and in some ways it's no more fitting a place than to acknowledge our veterans who have served Queen and country.Look Minister this is a good bill. We acknowledge your work in shepherding it through the House and I think the humility to acknowledge that this has been something that is cross-party and that many people have had a hand in. But I think it's important to acknowledge that it's you that tonight leads this through the House and I think it's a mark of respect from all here that after the second reading it will move speedily. So in honour of our veterans those who have served continue to serve I commend this bill to the House.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. A very heartfelt presentation and speech by the Hon Ron Mark and thank you for that. I too am very pleased to be standing in support of the Veterans' Support Amendment Bill—the first time I've been involved in a bill that's going through all stages as quickly as this one is tonight but as we've heard there is a huge amount of support for making sure that this wording in the original Act of 2014 is clarified because there was absolutely the intention to be able to declare those deployments to be qualifying operational service deployments. So it's up to us to actually rectify that and make sure that the wording allows for the retrospective declaration of those servicemen and women. Myself being an army mum you know I understand the value of supporting our veterans and the sacrifice that everyone who is deployed makes on behalf of this country. So there is absolutely no doubt that we were going to have 100 percent support across this House for this legislation. There were some questions and you know the select committee did scrutinise the wording of this bill quite thoroughly. I have to acknowledge the three advisers that serviced the select committee—three very capable women. It did make me think that if you have something that needs tidying up and with a bit of empathy—certainly the women were very capable of delivering on that—but also their passion for correcting this and making sure that the veterans that we were focused on were actually best served by this amendment to this bill. One of the questions that I actually raised with the advisers was around how we determined those people who were on qualifying operational service because it had been raised with me about servicemen that serve under another country's banner. So we were assured that even though they serve under say the Australian banner as long as they did that and were directed seconded or co-opted they actually did qualify. So there was conversation around whether those servicemen or women have taken the oath and it seems that the oath was not a necessary part of that as long as they were there under the direction of the Defence Force. So there were a few minor tweaks that we did make in light of some of the submissions. There were only four. It was a very truncated process because we do want to make sure that the Minister can continue to make those declarations. I think that we've well canvassed the amendment tonight. I take the opportunity too as the Minister has tonight to thank all our servicemen and women for their sacrifice for the country and I have pleasure in commending this bill to the House.
Barry MaggieHon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): Thank you Madam Speaker. In support of this bill I rise after the eloquent member who's just resumed his seat Hon Willie Jackson has run through the reasons why this bill is important. Not all bills enjoy cross-party support but at a time when the defence Minister whose responsibilities for veterans are included invited us from National to talk with him about the need for addressing this more quickly than other mechanisms could have done like a statutes amendment bill or something of that kind—if we had gone down that track which was one of the initial options that would have taken quite a lot longer and by the time you get 10 to 20 pieces of minor and technical amendments together it would have meant that the veterans wouldn't have got what they needed in a timely fashion.Because of the level of interventions that Ministers have had to make since the passing of this bill in 2014 it's very important I think that we retain the spirit of what was originally in that bill and that we also do not delay in giving the veterans their entitlements and the things that they deserve. Of course at the time that we took submissions there was a level of excitement among veterans that this might be their only opportunity to let the Minister and the wider public know of their wider concerns but this is a very narrowly focused bill that only seeks really to correct an anomaly that went into that first legislation. Various individual groups such as the Veterans' Association strongly support the intent of the amendment. That was very much the theme of all of the submissions. There weren't that many actually—under 10—but some of the veterans thought they might be able to open it up more widely and consider whether the time of engagement could be brought back to prior to 1974. That may well be able to be discussed in the wider review that the Minister's conducting.Ron Paterson has put together a comprehensive look at the range of issues that veterans need to establish and so those issues which include how you define a veteran and the level of engagement and service and what taking the oath really means—what are the level of entitlements and so forth—those will be debated in a wider arena than this and the Minister has undertaken that he will allow veterans the time for proper consultation. Our understanding was that until this was passed it would hold up the body of work that more veterans require. So from our perspective there didn't seem to be any need to waste any time on this particular thing. The original bill which was about 170 pages or so had a lot of very good elements within it but because of that anomaly and the 14 historical declarations Ministers have had to make since 2015 when it came into force that interpretation of section 9 has been troublesome. So without further ado and taking up further time in the House I will commend this bill to the House and we fully support it. Thank you.
Jackson WillieVETERANS' SUPPORT AMENDMENT BILLSecond ReadingHon WILLIE JACKSON (Minister of Employment) on behalf of the Minister for Veterans: I move That the Veterans' Support Amendment Bill be now read a second time. Firstly can I thank all the parties in the House for their unanimous support for this bill and for the constructive kōrero conversations that have been had with members opposite on the issue in particular the Hon Maggie Barry the Hon Judith Collins the Hon David Bennett the Hon Michael Woodhouse the Hon Nathan Guy and the Hon Gerry Brownlee. Following the discovery of an unintended drafting error in section nine of the Veterans Support Act 2014 the priority was to get this resolved as quickly as possible with cross-party support to ensure minimal disruption for veterans or for Veterans' Affairs and their work programme. The speed with which we are fixing the issue is an example of good governance operating in a bipartisan and cross-party manner. Can I thank the Social Services and Community Committee for reporting back on this bill in quick time and to the four submitters on the bill.It's noted that the committee considered that the bill as introduced needed no amendment. On this basis the Business Committee has determined that following the second reading the bill will be set down for third reading immediately and without debate. Again the Minister would like to thank the Business Committee for this decision as the longer the Act had been left unamended the longer many of those whom it was intended to benefit wouldn't have been able to access its support.As was covered in the first reading speech we know from the documents at the time of developing the primary legislation that the intention of the 2014 Act was that declarations of qualifying operational service could be made at any time before during or after deployments and that's how it has been interpreted since it was passed. So we had to get this fixed to clarify the status of the 14 retrospective declarations that have been made since 2015 covering multiple missions and geographical areas and affecting approximately 675 veterans and their spouses and family members including families of service personnel who were killed in action. When the bill is passed the Minister will be particularly pleased that the work of Veterans' Affairs will be looked at again at previous deployments and can restart with 39 deployments currently being reassessed in three geographical areas potentially extending entitlements to around 1600 veterans. The Minister looks forward to further recommendations coming forward for consideration.Can I emphasise that one of the Minister's primary areas of focus has been on improving the wellbeing of veterans and their families. This bill aligns with that intent by ensuring that all those who have served New Zealand in situations where they were put at risk of serious harm are treated equitably. I commend the Veterans' Support Amendment Bill to the House. Kia ora.
Little AndrewHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Justice): I move That this debate be now adjourned. A party vote was called for on the question That this debate be now adjourned. 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.
Speaker's Statement — Oral Questions Question No. 2—Presiding Officer Interventions
Mallard TrevorWEDNESDAY 19 JUNE 2019The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.SPEAKER'S STATEMENTSOral Questions 18 June—Speaker's RulingsSPEAKER: Before we come to oral questions I have reviewed the interchange between myself and the Hon Paula Bennett during question No. 2 yesterday. As I indicated to the House I was under the impression that the baby that was being referenced had died and that influenced my intervention. I have subsequently learnt that the media report I relied on was not correct. I apologise to both Ms Bennett and the House for my interventions yesterday.
Tuesday 18 June 2019 - Volume 739
Taxation (Annual Rates for 2019-20 GST Offshore Supplier Registration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee—Part 3
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 248 in the name of the Hon Stuart Nash to Part 3 be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to. Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8. Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross. Amendments agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That Part 3 as amended be agreed to. Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8. Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross. Part 3 as amended agreed to. Schedule 1A party vote was called for on the question That Schedule 1 be agreed to. Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8. Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross. Schedule 1 agreed to. Clauses 1 and 2A party vote was called for on the question That clause 1 stand part. Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8. Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross. Clause 1 agreed to. The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 248 in the name of the Hon Stuart Nash to clause 2 be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to. Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8. Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross. Amendment agreed to. CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): The Minister has informed me that Andrew Bayly's amendments to clause 2 set out on Supplementary Order Papers 251 and 252 may have an impact on the Government's fiscal aggregates. As the required 24 hours' notice was not given no question will be put on the amendments. A party vote was called for on the question That clause 2 as amended stand part. Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8. Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross. Clause 2 as amended agreed to. House resumed. Bill reported with amendment. Report adopted.
Taxation (Annual Rates for 2019-20 GST Offshore Supplier Registration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee—Part 2
VoteThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 248 in the name of the Hon Stuart Nash to Part 2 be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to. Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8. Noes 56New Zealand National 55; Ross. Amendments agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8. Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross. Part 2 as amended agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 56New Zealand National 55; Ross.Motion agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): The Minister has informed me that Andrew Bayly's amendment replacing clause 3 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 250 may have an impact on the Government's fiscal aggregates. As the required 24 hours' notice was not given no question will be put on the amendment.A party vote was called for on the question That Part 1 be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8.Noes 57New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1; Ross.Part 1 agreed to.
Taxation (Annual Rates for 2019-20 GST Offshore Supplier Registration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee—Part 1
7. Question No. 7—EducationJAN TINETTI (Labour) to the Minister of EducationQuestion No. 7—Education7. JAN TINETTI (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What recent investments has the Government made in school property to meet population growth?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): The Wellbeing Budget makes the largest investment in school property by a New Zealand Government with a whopping $1.2 billion to fund new schools kura specialist schools and additional classrooms to meet roll growth. The $1.2 billion investment will be delivered in four waves allowing us to work closely with the construction sector to get the right mix of large medium and small projects across the region where growth is occurring. It'll also allow us to deliver at scale using local suppliers in the regions where appropriate.Jan Tinetti: What planning has the coalition Government done to support this large investment in school property?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The coalition Government will be releasing the national education growth plan shortly. It identifies the number of student spaces required around New Zealand by 2030 as the school-age population continues to grow. The growth plan is a first for New Zealand representing a step change in the way we plan for and manage growth in the school-age population school redevelopments and school builds. Instead of reacting to population issues school by school we'll be taking a longer-term view across schools.Jan Tinetti: How does the Government's $1.2 billion investment in school property support a longer-term approach to planning and building for school property?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The $1.2 billion is a multi-year commitment to build new schools and classrooms setting aside funding for the first four waves of a 10-year school property programme. Previously investment decisions were made annually which made strategic planning quite difficult. The growth plan and the upfront investment allows officials to plan over a longer time frame giving schools and communities greater confidence about their projects. The groundbreaking programme will give certainty to schools to their communities and of course to the construction sector. It'll streamline the procurement processes and give taxpayers better value for money with less disruption.
4. Question No. 4—FinanceDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 4—Finance4. Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of Finance: What reactions has he seen to Budget 2019?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I've been contacted by many New Zealanders who have expressed support for the approach we have taken with the Wellbeing Budget. They understand that we can't fix all New Zealand's problems with one Budget but that Budget 2019 represents a new way of doing things and is an important step in the right direction. For example one resident from Raglan emailed to say that the Government and all who have contributed to the Budget are to be congratulated. He said that Although some would have wished for more the Budget lays the foundation for a sustainable economic future in which the whole of New Zealand will receive a share."Dr Deborah Russell: What reactions has he seen to Budget 2019 from the business sector? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I've seen warm reactions to the Budget from various business groups. According to Deloitte "wherever you sit in the conversation of how innovative the … Budget is there is little doubt that cross-agency allocations for issues like climate change family violence homelessness child wellbeing reducing Māori offending and addressing mental health are essential." Deloitte partner David Lovatt said that where the wellbeing approach really shines is "Compelling agencies to work together by funding them in ways that reward collaboration measuring the impacts they are having and then ultimately holding them publicly accountable are precursors to being able to achieve progress on these perennial issues." The New Zealand head of Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand Peter Vial said that—SPEAKER: Order! Order! That's enough. Dr Deborah Russell: What reactions has he seen from Māori and Pasifika groups to the Wellbeing Budget?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Yesterday with my colleagues Ministers Sio and Salesa I met with around 150 leaders from the Pasifika community in Porirua. There was resounding support for the measures being taken to enhance the wellbeing of Pacific peoples—in particular investing in Pasifika economic opportunities supporting Pacific languages and communities and boosting funding for Pacific health. This is a Budget based on evidence and the evidence suggests that the status quo has not worked for Māori and Pasifika peoples. Through this Budget we are giving them more scope to lift their own wellbeing and achieve their aspirations."
Administration of Justice (Reform of Contempt of Court) Bill — Second Reading