edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Ross Jami-Lee: New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Amendment Bill Taxation (New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income) Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Amendment Bill Taxation (New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income) Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7375. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany): The position I take in these debates usually has me providing lots of rebuttal to whatever Fletcher Tabuteau says in the debates. Given that he is now talking about the National Party being full of common sense and that he is coming on board and is agreeing with us I do not have much content. We have been working on him quite hard during select committees to bring him across to the right side of the House but he did make some sense. He was talking about the fact that this legislation arising from the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Amendment Bill is a good thing and is quite logical.The Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation have asked for this change to be made through legislation and we are doing it. It is an almost $30 billion fund—it is doing very well—but of course there is room for improvement and so the guardians have asked for some legislation to enable them to make use of fund investment vehicles and this legislation does this.It is a very simple small bill—it is only 2½ pages—but it will be quite crucial to enable the guardians to operate that fund more efficiently. I do want to touch on a couple of matters though. There has been discussion in the House about the way in which the fund invests and whether politicians should get involved or not. Absolutely politicians should not be getting involved in this fund. The guardians are experts in their field they are the people who know best how to invest this money and we should be allowing them to get on and do that.The second point I want to make is around the lack of—supposedly—contributions that this Government has made to the fund. Well there is a really good reason for that and that is because we have been through a global financial crisis. The country has been through difficulty and to say that the Government should have continued to invest funds into the Superannuation Fund and borrowed to do that is like saying that you should go and invest on the stock exchange by using money off your credit card. Well it would be silly to do that it would be economically wrong for us to do that and that is why the Government ceased making contributions to the Superannuation Fund.Mr Tabuteau wants to talk about the supposed $10 billion of lost opportunity where $10 billion he says has not gone to the fund. Well New Zealand First members would be the first ones to be complaining if the Government debt was $10 billion higher so there is a very good reason why the Government had to cease contributions. The fund is doing very well though. There is opportunity for improvement we are doing that through this legislation and I support it.
Mallard Trevor: New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Amendment Bill Taxation (New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income) Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Amendment Bill Taxation (New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income) Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7368. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Dr David—[Interruption] Can I just ask members as I am about to call another member—I have already called Mr Bennett to order for making gratuitous and silly comments to the member. I will invite him not to invite any more of them.
Macindoe Tim: Construction Contracts Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Construction Contracts Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7363. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West):It comes as news to those of us on this side of the House to hear that the Hon Clayton Cosgrove even had any meetings on this bill. I want to give the proper credit to the Hon Dr Nick Smith for the work that he and his officials have done because that is where the credit really belongs. Nevertheless there is clearly broad support across the House for this important measure. I welcome that and I am happy to add my support to this bill.Bill read a third time.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Construction Contracts Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Construction Contracts Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7354. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): Thank you for the opportunity to stand and support the Construction Contracts Amendments Bill. I totally disagree with the previous speaker Phil Twyford who said that this bill does not do anything. I think this bill is a very good bill brought by the Minister for Building and Housing and one of the things that this bill makes sure is that the retention money of the subbies is protected. That is a big concern for those subbies who really work hard and their retention money is never paid to them and it is a big challenge for the Government to make sure their rights are protected. This bill will also stop the contractors using that retention money as capital for their other projects. Sometimes they go bust in new projects and this retention money is never paid back to the subbies.We are going through a construction boom whether it is in Auckland or in Christchurch and we are making sure that the quality and the productivity are held at the highest level. This is very important because as our Minister the Hon Simon Bridges mentioned in west Auckland the tunnelling project is one of the biggest projects in the history of New Zealand. It is progressing very well and the people who are working on such projects which are going to contribute to this economy should be paid on time. With these words I commend this bill to the House.
Hudson Brett: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7346. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.BRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister of Statistics: What recent announcement has the Government made on the Data Futures Partnership?Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister of Statistics): Last week the Minister of Finance and I announced the formation of the Data Futures Partnership. This is an independent group spanning the business community Māori and the public sector which will be working to create an environment for trusted data-use in New Zealand and to increase the value generated from New Zealand’s data use. The partnership has been designed to embody the principles of value inclusion trust and control which were identified by the Data Futures Forum as essential to making data work for all of New Zealand. The partnership will focus on providing meaningful impact through the delivery of catalyst projects tackling challenges and issues preventing effective data-use.Brett Hudson: What expectations does the Minister have of the Data Futures Partnership?Hon CRAIG FOSS: I expect that the partnership will work to strengthen the data-use environment in accordance with the guiding principles of value inclusion trust and control by undertaking activities in areas such as progress in catalyst data-use projects championing data-use innovation and facilitating an inclusive social licence. I understand that the partnership is very keen to get under way and I am looking forward to its reports.
Barclay Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarclay Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7344. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.TODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland) to the Minister for Communications: What recent announcements has she made regarding rural connectivity?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister for Communications): Earlier this month I announced that the Government was adopting ambitious targets for rural connectivity. Under this target 99 percent of New Zealanders regardless of where they live or work will be able to access broadband at peak speeds of at least 50 megabits per second and the remaining 1 percent of New Zealanders will be able to access speeds of 10 megabits per second by 2025. All Kiwis whether urban or rural deserve access to the economic and social opportunities that high-speed connectivity brings and the National-led Government is delivering it.Todd Barclay: How do these targets stack up internationally?Hon AMY ADAMS: Most developed countries including the likes of the US and the UK have established broadband speeds and coverage targets. These targets that I have announced for rural connectivity are more ambitious than the aspirations of countries such as the UK the US Australia and Canada and will see New Zealand move from 17th to seventh in the world for rural connectivity targets and ensure that no one misses out on the opportunities of the digital age.Rt Hon Winston Peters: If any of that is true what budget has been set aside to upgrade existing infrastructure including broadband cabinets in Northland to ensure that existing businesses and households regain secure and reliable internet speeds which have been drastically reduced last year as new customers signed up while speed and reliability fell away for existing customers?Hon AMY ADAMS: First of all I can assure that member that internet speeds have tripled under this Government and are on target to double again and I can further tell him that we have so far committed $2 billion of funding towards infrastructure across the country. Although I cannot give him the exact breakdown for Northland on my feet I can assure him that Northland has done very well under both the ultra-fast broadband and the Rural Broadband Initiative projects and it is thanks only to the National-led Government otherwise it would have had zero.
Ngaro Alfred: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNgaro Alfred: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7341. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.ALFRED NGARO (National) to the Minister of Transport: What recent reports has he seen on progress with the Government’s Waterview Connection Project in Auckland?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): Yesterday Alice the world’s tenth-largest tunnel-boring machine completed the second of the twin three-lane tunnels marking a major step towards completing the Government’s $1.4 billion Waterview Connection project and indeed the western ring route. The tunnels will be the longest road tunnels in New Zealand each being 2.4 kilometres long twice the length of the Auckland Harbour Bridge. Finally can I just acknowledge the 800 staff and contractors who have worked hard on the tunnels and congratulate them on their engineering skills and innovation to complete this job safely and on time. It is a fantastic achievement.Alfred Ngaro: How will the Waterview Connection benefit road users and support the future growth of Auckland’s population and economy?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: The Waterview Connection tunnels are a critical part of the Government’s strong investment in Auckland’s motorway network to support its population and economic growth. The Waterview Connection and adjacent Great North Road interchange are expected to open in early 2017. That will complete a 48-kilometre alternative route around Auckland reducing travel time for motorists and congestion on Auckland’s roading network. Although it is the end of the road for Alice she leaves behind world-class tunnels that will benefit Auckland and New Zealand for 100 years or more.
Carter David: Privilege — Maritime New Zealand—Actions in Relation to Evidence Provided to Select CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Privilege — Maritime New Zealand—Actions in Relation to Evidence Provided to Select Committee[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7333. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon David Cunliffe raising as a matter of privilege the alleged action taken by Maritime New Zealand in relation to the managing director of Maritime Management Services Ltd following evidence she gave to the Regulations Review Committee. It is suggested that this action could amount to a contempt of the House in that the managing director may have been disadvantaged on account of giving that evidence.When a matter of privilege is raised the Speaker determines whether a question of privilege exists. The Speaker does not inquire into the validity of the evidence presented or fully inquire into the matter raised. Rather he or she appraises the evidence provided with the complaint to determine whether it points to a reasonable—not a remote—possibility that a breach of privilege or a contempt occurred. It is for the Privileges Committee to investigate the matter and to report its findings to the House.The matter of privilege raised is a significant one. An allegation that a State sector agency used its power against a person on account of evidence given to a select committee requires serious attention given the importance of free speech to this House. Consequently I rule that a question of privilege does arise from the action taken by Maritime New Zealand in relation to the managing director of Maritime Management Services Ltd following her giving evidence to the Regulations Review Committee. That question therefore stands referred to the Privileges Committee.
Brownlee Gerry: Motions — New Zealand Red Cross—CentenaryText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Motions — New Zealand Red Cross—Centenary[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7333. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):It is a very important day where the Red Cross is being recognised for its contribution to New Zealand. It is my intention to read the motion.Mr SPEAKER: So you are seeking leave to—Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: —reflect that. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order!Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I thank the Prime Minister for his assistance there. I move That the House congratulate the New Zealand Red Cross—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can the member just seek leave to move the motion without debate first.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I seek leave to—Mr SPEAKER: —move the motion without debate. Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is none.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I was a bit disconcerted. There has been so much criticism of people in this House in procedural roles lately I was perhaps being just a little overly cautious. However I move That the House congratulate New Zealand Red Cross on the Centenary of Red Cross activity in New Zealand and acknowledge the contribution of thousands of New Zealanders who have since 1915worked with New Zealand Red Cross in its role as an auxiliary to the public authorities in the humanitarian field in order to improve the lives of vulnerable people at home and abroad especially in times of disaster.Motion agreed to.
Privilege — Maritime New Zealand—Actions in Relation to Evidence Provided to Select CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePrivilege — Maritime New Zealand—Actions in Relation to Evidence Provided to Select Committee[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7333. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PrivilegeMaritime New Zealand—Actions in Relation to Evidence Provided to Select CommitteeMr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon David Cunliffe raising as a matter of privilege the alleged action taken by Maritime New Zealand in relation to the managing director of Maritime Management Services Ltd following evidence she gave to the Regulations Review Committee. It is suggested that this action could amount to a contempt of the House in that the managing director may have been disadvantaged on account of giving that evidence.When a matter of privilege is raised the Speaker determines whether a question of privilege exists. The Speaker does not inquire into the validity of the evidence presented or fully inquire into the matter raised. Rather he or she appraises the evidence provided with the complaint to determine whether it points to a reasonable—not a remote—possibility that a breach of privilege or a contempt occurred. It is for the Privileges Committee to investigate the matter and to report its findings to the House.The matter of privilege raised is a significant one. An allegation that a State sector agency used its power against a person on account of evidence given to a select committee requires serious attention given the importance of free speech to this House. Consequently I rule that a question of privilege does arise from the action taken by Maritime New Zealand in relation to the managing director of Maritime Management Services Ltd following her giving evidence to the Regulations Review Committee. That question therefore stands referred to the Privileges Committee.
Motions — New Zealand Red Cross—CentenaryText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMotions — New Zealand Red Cross—Centenary[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7333. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Tuesday 20 October 2015Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.MotionsNew Zealand Red Cross—CentenaryHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):It is a very important day where the Red Cross is being recognised for its contribution to New Zealand. It is my intention to read the motion.Mr SPEAKER: So you are seeking leave to—Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: —reflect that. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order!Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I thank the Prime Minister for his assistance there. I move That the House congratulate the New Zealand Red Cross—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can the member just seek leave to move the motion without debate first.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I seek leave to—Mr SPEAKER: —move the motion without debate. Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is none.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I was a bit disconcerted. There has been so much criticism of people in this House in procedural roles lately I was perhaps being just a little overly cautious. However I move That the House congratulate New Zealand Red Cross on the Centenary of Red Cross activity in New Zealand and acknowledge the contribution of thousands of New Zealanders who have since 1915worked with New Zealand Red Cross in its role as an auxiliary to the public authorities in the humanitarian field in order to improve the lives of vulnerable people at home and abroad especially in times of disaster.Motion agreed to.
Vote: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7332. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Standards and Accreditation Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 58New Zealand Labour 30; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Bill read a third time.
Vote: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7326. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a third time.Ayes 91New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 30; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 28Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2.Bill read a third time.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 93 Noes 28.
Naylor Jono: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7332. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONO NAYLOR (National): That is 10 minutes we will never get back is it not? But anyway I commend this bill to the House.
Mallard Trevor: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7332. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! The member’s time has expired.
O'Connor Simon: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7330. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I am very pleased to support this bill. I sat on the Commerce Committee as we considered this. Although I understand the reservations being put forward by the Opposition I think that for me they are more rhetoric than real. I think other speakers before me have well articulated the issues from the Government’s side in terms of why we support it and I look forward to it passing its third reading this evening. Thank you very much.
Collins Judith: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCollins Judith: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7328. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura): Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The Hon Judith Collins.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Thank you so much Mr Assistant Speaker. Gosh I worked hard for that—we do not want to give it away do we? This bill is actually a really good bill. I sat on the select committee that dealt with the Standards and Accreditation Bill the Commerce Committee and I must say I thought “Oh dear. This is going to be deathly dull.” but it was not; it was really interesting.This year I have actually looked at quite a lot of the standards around building and all sorts of other things—around gases and things—for my university work and I would say to that member who has just resumed his seat Fletcher Tabuteau that standards are actually not easy to access. You have got to be able to pay for them. They are quite hard to access and one of the big problems we have got at the moment is that quite a lot of the work for standards is behind the times.So what we know for instance is that testing in a laboratory accredited by the Testing Laboratory Registration Council is now a requirement for more than $20 billion of New Zealand’s exports. We have a tremendous requirement for our exporters to be able to get the accreditations that they need as quickly as possible because they are in a market that can move very fast and can move away from another product. It is not easy. Standards New Zealand at the moment is too slow. It does a great job but we need to give it some help and this is what this bill is really designed to do. Thank you.
Mallard Trevor: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7328. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Judith Collins.
Mallard Trevor: Voting — Correction—Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3)Text is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Voting — Correction—Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3)[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7328. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Leave is sought to that effect. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. That will be done. So I will just redeclare the result: the result is now Ayes 91 Noes 28. Thank you very much. It will be read a third time still and it has already been so we will not do that again.
Hipkins Chris: Voting — Correction—Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3)Text is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Voting — Correction—Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3)[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7328. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): With apologies to the House for stepping out at a very injudicious moment I seek leave to correct the number of votes cast on behalf of the Labour Party on the Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) to 30 votes in favour.
Parmar Parmjeet: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParmar Parmjeet: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7326. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3). I am not on the select committee that considered this bill the Government Administration Committee so it is a great opportunity for me to be able to speak on its third reading. For some gambling is fine—it is a leisure activityas we heard—but for others it becomes a problem that leads to numerous negative consequences. The services for problem gambling are funded through a levy collected from various gambling operators. This levy is collected from the profit of the four main gambling operators which are machines and pokie machines in bars and pubs casinos the New Zealand Racing Board and the New Zealand Lotteries Commission. This bill is to mainly bring changes around machines and pokie machines in bars and pubs.We know that gambling leads to devastating effects and this National Government is really keen on reducing the harm that is caused by gambling. Harm minimisation is one of the priorities of this National Government. This bill has additional harm minimisation regulation-making powers that may offer the opportunity to introduce additional well-targeted interventions in the future. This National Government is also very keen to see that the Gambling Act is properly enforced—that is for the money that is raised through gambling to be put back into the community because the policy framework of the Gambling Act is that the money raised through gambling should be put back into the community.This bill is to bring changes around class 4 gambling and this bill is also to simplify the way societies pay pubs and bars for hosting gambling machines and also to ensure that as far as possible the maximum amount of money raised is put back into the local community where gaming occurs. It is a great bill I support this bill and I commend this bill to the House.
Naylor Jono: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7323. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONO NAYLOR (National): If I can pick up very briefly on where my colleague Maurice Williamson left off giving the traffic update only to say that in Palmerston North rush hour is always seen as a positive thing because you actually get to hear the end of the song that you were listening to on the radio before you get home. That is not something that you usually manage to do when commuting in Palmerston North. But I will just come back to the bill of course because I am sure that if I do not do so quickly you will bring me back on track very quickly Mr Assistant Speaker.Over the years in terms of my dealings—whether it be through local government or in this realm—where there has been talk about class 4 gambling or pokies or otherwise there have been three things in particular that people have brought to my attention. The first one has been issues around problem gambling and that has been talked about a little bit this afternoon as well. The two other things that people really talk to me about are their concerns about whether or not the funds that are being spent locally on pokie machinesare going back locally in terms of the returns back to the community and community organisations and whether or not operators are in fact skimming if you like more off the profits or profiteering in some way from these machines when in fact they are only ever supposed to get a cost recovery regime through the process of operating these machines in their venues.I think this bill does some good work in ensuring this and giving some confidence and transparency to communities that where money has been spent on gaming machines in their locality the returns from that will go back to those communities. I think that is a really critical factor. One of the big criticisms of this source of funding in the past is that it has been brought together in one lump and then sent into different communities. As other speakers have said often the money has been taken from communities that cannot necessarily afford it or otherwise so it is appropriate that the money and the proceeds from these gaming machines do go back into those communities. So I commend the Minister of Internal Affairs Peter Dunne and the Government Administration Committee for ensuring that that happens through this process.Of course the other concern is about having a greater level of transparency and accountability for the operators to ensure that they are not using this as a form of income for themselves. I do recognise that for some people it is an entertainment that they engage in while they are in a licensed premise but the purpose of these machines is not for operators to make significant profits. The increased accountability and transparency in this bill around class 4 gambling is I think going to be a positive thing going forward. I am happy to support this bill at its third reading. Thank you.
Williamson Maurice: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliamson Maurice: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7320. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National—Pakuranga): Can I start by first of all thanking our whips for giving me another slot in the drive time audience show because people will be listening quite intently. I can tell them that all is flowing well on the south-eastern arterial and the Pakuranga Highway and you will be home within another half an hour to an hour. I feel a little bit like Selena off Breakfaston TV. I have got the iPad in my hand and I am giving them traffic updates—but back to the bill.I am not going to take a long time on the bill because it seems like it is a pretty sensible bill. It seems like it is something that was overdue to be sorted out to improve transparency. I will just explain to the drive time audience what this is about. It is about class 4 gambling. If you check on 10 people at random down on Lambton Quay they will not know what that means. It is just to do with the pokie machines in pubs and clubs. We give them that fancy name of “class 4”. It is about the fact that there is money earned from those machines and then how it gets back to be distributed to community groups and organisations. I guess that every one of us could imagine just how murky and even how corrupt that process could get if there were not some really good sets of rules around it.So the Government has got a really important primary focus in any of the gambling legislation which is to make sure that the Gambling Act is working properly for both operators and for the benefit of the community and that we are minimising any harm to people in terms of the problem-gambling side of it. So what this bill does is it increases the transparency that is in the regime that will be there. So as money is collected from these machines and then redistributed back through to the community it will be a very very transparent process and anyone who wants to—including enforcement agencies—can go and check on those numbers and see what is happening. It should reduce the potential of conflicts of interest situations between class 4 gambling operators—which are the societies as we call them—and the venues and the grant recipients. Again you want to make sure that there is not someone who has got that conflict of interest and who benefits substantially by also being the provider of the gambling outlets. It improves transparency surrounding management companies that provide societies with services. It simplifies compliance and reduces costs for those societies and the venue operators—and that could only be good if we make it as simple as we can make it—and it ensures that the efficiency of the appeals process is not undermined. I think that is all I want to say about the bill. I think it is a damned good bill and I commend it to the House.
Mitchell Mark: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7313. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): I am very pleased to take a call on this the third reading of the Gambling Amendment Bill (No 3) and I would like to acknowledge the Minister of Internal Affairs and his officials for the hard work that they have put into this bill. It is actually a really important bill because it is around transparency. It is about reducing compliance and red tape. It is about making sure actually that the money and the funds find their way back to the community through the sports groups the community groups. Actually removing the debate around pokie machines that money and that funding is actually really important to them. I am talking about groups like Surf Life Saving clubs sports clubs and clubs that are delivering services in our communities. So it is actually a really important bill. It is a very good bill.In terms of trying to get transparency around the management fees to me—and I have spoken about it before in the House—this is fundamentally a really important part of this bill. In my own experience—certainly overseas and having seen some NGOs’ work—when you actually do a breakdown and when you actually look at every dollar that is donated sometimes you see as little as 5 or 10 percent of that money actually finding its way back to the community. The rest of it is absorbed in management fees. So the fact that this bill addresses those types of issues is actually really important. We want to see as much money as we can going back to the communities in which those pokies reside.I just want to acknowledge the fact that I think was raised earlier by the previous speaker Adrian Rurawhe around harm minimisation. We did hear a fair bit of evidence on the committee around harm minimisation and I think actually we are moving in the right direction on that. There are some very good technologies that are becoming available like facial recognition technology which removes the necessity for the actual workers inside the licensed premises to have to monitor that and sometimes put themselves in a position of conflict or confrontation. These technologies are becoming available and as they become more cost-effective they are going to reduce a lot of those issues. I would just like to confirm again and acknowledge the Minister for bringing this bill to the House. It is an important bill and I am very happy to support it in its third reading. Thank you very much.
Barclay Todd: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarclay Todd: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7309. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland): It is a privilege to speak in support of the Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) in its third reading. I would just like to acknowledge the Hon Peter Dunne Minister of Internal Affairs for your sense of work and efforts on this piece of legislation. I can assure you from the feedback that I have had—and it has been considerable from my electorate—that this piece of legislation is going down incredibly well. It has been highly welcomed in a number of quarters in my electorate.I would also like to acknowledge the Government Administration Committee—in particular the chairperson the Hon Ruth Dyson and the deputy chairperson Sarah Dowie for their joint dynamic leadership and comprehensive scrutiny of this bill. It is a tough committee sometimes given that the Government does not have a majority on the legislation. But through the cooperation and intense relationship-building that has taken place between all members of the committee it has managed to get this piece of important legislation through incredibly quickly.We are a transparent and collaborative Government and that is why we welcome the extension of the validity period of New Zealand passports from 5 to 10 years as we know for citizens aged 16 years and over. The reasons behind those people under the age of 16 not being included in the extension period have been well canvassed throughout the debate so I will not touch on them again.As has already been pointed out we are considerable travellers with around 77 percent of New Zealanders owning a passport. In Queenstown in my electorate of Clutha-Southland we have seen an incredible increase in the number of flights between the east coast of Australia and New Zealand contributing both to New Zealand’s tourism number increases and also to the level of New Zealanders travelling back to Australia. In the ski season there are about 56 or 58 direct flights a week from the east coast of Australia to Queenstown. That is bringing thousands of Australians over to New Zealand but it is also facilitating thousands more Kiwis from the southern part of the South Island travelling overseas particularly to Australia. So this legislation whether it be for business or for personal and family leisure travellers increases their ability to do that by reducing the cost quite considerably. To that end I am proud to support this bill and I commend it to the House. Thank you.Bill read a third time.
Foster-Bell Paul: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7306. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): Kia ora e te Mana Whakawā Tuarua. Tēnā koutou katoa e ngā mema o te Whare Pāremata. In speaking to this Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) in this third reading debate I want to congratulate the Government and the Minister of Internal Affairs the Hon Peter Dunne for bringing in an incredibly sensible piece of legislation. It has been a long time coming and New Zealanders are going to benefit significantly from reduced costs and reduced inconvenience in their passport applications and using New Zealand passports overseas.I am probably the only member in this House actually who has ever issued a New Zealand passport. On the occasions when I did produce emergency travel documents for New Zealanders who were stranded overseas in the Middle East it was often to do with the validity period. Sometimes people lose their passports but often the 5-year validity period slips by very quickly and people find themselves stranded in an alien environment without a current passport. So this is a welcome measure. It is very sensible.We have had a lot of quality contributions from members of the House. I particularly enjoyed David Clendon’s contribution on this where he sounded somewhat like Murray the deputy cultural attaché for New Zealand in Flight of the Conchords in that he was promoting that we should visit New Zealand and see New Zealand before we go overseas. It sounds like a tourism slogan from the 1970s. But in any case this is a very sensible measure from a very sensible Government and it does take a National Government to get this sort of thing sorted out. It is a wonderful measure. I commend it to the House.
Borrows Chester: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call Meka Whaitiri—a 5-minute call.
Borrows Chester: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7304. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call David Clendon—a 5-minute call.
Mitchell Mark: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Passports Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7298. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): I am very pleased to take a short call on this Passports Amendment Bill (No 2). I just want to support the comments of Adrian Rurawhe the previous speaker in relation to the Minister of Internal Affairs and his officials bringing this bill to the House. It is a very popular bill and I have to say that it is one of those bills that had unanimous support in terms of making sure that the select committee was as quick and as efficient as we could be in getting the bill back to the House. It is amazing how many Kiwis are standing by and waiting—I see that Nanaia Mahuta is one of them—in terms of delaying their passport renewal because they are waiting to be able to actually go for the 10-year passport. The good news is that they should be able to do that in November of this year in time for the Christmas holidays and their Christmas travel.I want to acknowledge the chair of the Government Administration Committee the Hon Ruth Dyson and the deputy chair Sarah Dowie who are not in the House today—Chris Bishop: Did a great job. Sarah did a great job.MARK MITCHELL: She did. Sarah Dowie did an outstanding job in making sure that this bill went smoothly through the select committee process and back to the House for this third reading.Kiwis love to travel—77 percent of us travel. We have got a long history of doing our OE which of course has transitioned into a lot of Kiwis being mobile and travelling around the world on holiday or choosing to work and taking their families and living overseas for a period. It was understandable that after 11 September 2001 there was a greater focus on security and therefore a lot of countries did make the change to a 5-year passport. But most of those countries are now starting to transition back to 10-year passports primarily because the investment that most countries have made into passport security has been significant. We can all see just how efficient and how good our own systems are at our own border when we come back and we are able to access systems such as SmartGate.The other thing that I did want to mention very quickly—which the Minister referred to and that I agree is important—is the validity period of refugee travel documents. Although they are a small part of our community here in New Zealand they are an important part and it was actually really important to get that aligned from a 2-year period to the 5-year period.So I am very happy to take a call and see this bill back in the House for its third reading. Thank you.
Carter David: Points of Order — Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)—Compliance with Standing OrdersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)—Compliance with Standing Orders[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a fair statement at all. I gave this considerable thought. I sought counsel before I made this decision and—[Interruption] Order! [Interruption] Order! If the member wants to leave the Chamber by interjecting while I am on my feet he is going the right way about it. I gave considerable thought to this issue. As I said I think I have charted a very fair path forward and I do not intend to relitigate the matter.
Hipkins Chris: Points of Order — Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)—Compliance with Standing OrdersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Points of Order — Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)—Compliance with Standing Orders[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I simply ask you to reconsider the last part of my point of order which was to take the matter to the Business Committee or the Standing Orders Committee because the effect of the ruling that you have just made is that members can have no confidence in the advice they receive from the Office of the Clerk and that cannot be allowed to stand.
Carter David: Points of Order — Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)—Compliance with Standing OrdersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)—Compliance with Standing Orders[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7295. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: No. [Interruption] Order! We have now got to the situation where we are just relitigating a decision I have given. In this particular case the rules are quite clear with regard to the Standing Orders. A bill that has been defeated cannot be brought back almost exactly the same in a calendar year. In my opinion that is what has happened. I have found a way forward by which I have not ruled it out of order at this stage. If it was to come forward in this calendar year I would do so and I have clearly made that statement to the House. If the member bothers to look at the Order Paper the chances of that happening are indeed very very slim so I think we have found a way forward. But the point made by Chris Hipkins is that this is the first time it has ever happened. It is a precedent. I hope it never happens again. I am not prepared to enter—Chris Hipkins: Point of order—Mr SPEAKER: We are now wasting a lot of time. If it is a fresh point of order I am happy to hear it but it is to have nothing to do with the ruling I gave earlier.
Parker David: Points of Order — Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)—Compliance with Standing OrdersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Points of Order — Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)—Compliance with Standing Orders[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7295. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour): Well I am seeking clarification because how can the Speaker know the basis upon which members cast a vote for legislation? Members could say: “Well actually I did not like that legislation because I did not think it should be the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment; it should be the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority.” You cannot know that—