edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Macindoe Tim: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:18017. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I am delighted to take the final call in the third reading on these very important measures the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill which are such a significant part of a very good Budget. Yesterday it was a real thrill to be able to be in the House hearing that the Government has delivered on its promise of returning the books to surplus and is also focusing on things that matter. The fact that families are absolutely at the heart of this Budget is as it should be. Times have been difficult and now we are starting to be able to put in place some of the things that members on this side of the House have always wanted to be able to do. But unlike those on the other side of the House we have known that you cannot spend money that you do not have. I commend the Minister of Labour for the excellent work that he has done. I am delighted that this support for newborn children is such an integral part of the Budget. I commend all members of the Government for the hard work that has gone on. I am sure that these are measures that will be warmly welcomed around the country.Bills read a third time.
Calder Cam: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCalder Cam: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:18015. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr CAM CALDER (National): It is a great pleasure to rise and speak on the third readings of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill. This Government is a compassionate Government. We have put strengthening families at the core of our policy ever since we have been on the Treasury benches. We are strengthening families and providing them with the means to be cushioned from the worst effects of the recession—the worst recession in fact in the last 70 years.I am very happy on behalf of the hard-working men and women of Manurewa the vibrant and diverse community where I have the pleasure of having my office to know they will be able to take their children to a general practitioner for free visits until they turn 13. There will be even more money and this Government has spent $1.5 billion—even more money—to engage with our Pasifika and Māori communities and low socio-economic groups to help them access early childhood education which as we know is transformational. I commend these bills to the House.
Bennett David: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBennett David: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:18012. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East): Just in response to the last speaker Tracey Martin I say that this legislation arising from the Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill is good legislation that the Government has used to boost parental leave provisions. It is all part of the programme of that $500 million that is going to families in this Budget. It is action taken by a political party when there is the opportunity to do so unlike the Opposition which is all talk and no action. When we got the chance we have done it and we have delivered the things thatthe Opposition were not even talking about like free doctors visits to under-13s. This is good legislation.
Bridges Simon: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBridges Simon: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:18003. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Labour): I moveThat the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Bill be now read a third time.Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am just checking whether these are separate bills.Mr SPEAKER: Yes the bills are separate bills.Hon Trevor Mallard: And are we having separate debates on them?Mr SPEAKER: No we are not having separate debates.Hon Trevor Mallard: Are we going to vote separately on them?Mr SPEAKER: If the member seeks leave to do so I guess we can.Hon Trevor Mallard: Do we need leave or will you put them separately?Mr SPEAKER: I was proposing not to put them separately. I was proposing to put them together.Hon Trevor Mallard: Well they are quite separate issues.Mr SPEAKER: I accept that they are quite separate issues but I understand they can still be put together.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: It gives me great satisfaction to support these bills at their third readings. I would like to thank the whole House for supporting the passage of these bills. These bills help provide financial and employment certainty to working families with newborn children in New Zealand. In the first year of a child’s life particularly the first 6 months it is important for the development of newborn children that they receive full-time personal care. Parents and caregivers need support to manage budgetary and other pressures over this time support that the current paid parental leave and parental tax credit entitlements do not provide as well as they could. Encouraging working mothers and caregivers to remain attached to the labour market has broad economic and social benefits and can support a stable family environment for children to grow up in.These bills support the aims of allowing working families with newborns the time to bond while maintaining workforce attachment and employment security. They recognise that improved financial support is needed for some of these families. The bills also recognise that we have to manage our purse strings carefully. By supporting working families with newborn children these bills are in the best interests of New Zealand families and businesses enhancing economic and social outcomes in a fiscally responsible manner. I commend these bills to the House.
Mallard Trevor: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:18002. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I just rise to support the Minister of Labour in this particular decision to divide the Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill. It is absolutely clear that this bill is one that it is very very necessary to divide. If it was not divided then we would have a separate Act that contained changes to the Income Tax Act and changes to the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act that were together. Although of course they would stand as the law of the country it would make it almost impossible to reference those particular sections because they would not sit within the relevant legislation; they would be sitting outside it. It would be quite a problem—quite a problem—for people who were attempting to refer to particular sections. It would be a problem for people who were looking for these changes. They would go to the Act and they would find for example in their particular law libraries the 2004 or 2006 changes sitting within the Act but they would not be able to find these relevant changes because the cross-referencing would not be done at all.I find it slightly extraordinary that we are having a debate in this area. I think it might be described as unprecedented. I am not absolutely certain within the Standing Orders whether it is allowed. But I think it is an interesting test. I wonder whether in fact I should raise a point of order against myself because certainly if I was on the other side I would have raised a point of order to say that a speech on the division of a bill is not consistent with the Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings. But it appears Mr Chairperson Robertson that in the dying days of your role in the Chair you are setting precedents and this is an interesting precedent. I think it is fair to say that it is a precedent that a future Chairperson will no doubt overrule—will no doubt overrule.But it is not often that I can be 100 percent supportive of a Minister. In most of the stuff we have spoken on previously I have said he should have gone further or he did not go far enough even though we were voting for the particular clause. But the motion that he has moved that the bill be divided is something that we are totally supportive of. It is a wonderful thing to do. It is necessary for the law of the land to be properly interpreted and for this particular bill which refers to a number of Acts to be properly placed within that legislation. If we did not do this then of course that would not occur. But the idea that it gets debated is certainly novel.Motion agreed to.Bill reported without amendment.Report adopted.
Bridges Simon: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBridges Simon: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:18002. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Labour): I moveThat the Committee divide the bill into the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Taxation (Parental Tax Credit) Billpursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 448.
Ross Jami-Lee: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:18001. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Robertson H V Ross: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17998. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Thank you. [Interruption] No I do not need any help Mr Sabin. Can I just say that when I am giving a ruling it is unparliamentary and it is discourteous to continue to interject or carry on a conversation during that period. That is totally out of order and I ask the member to desist.
Mallard Trevor: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17998. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. During the time that you were making your ruling—which I think was a good ruling and could well make it into theSpeakers’ Rulings given time—Mike Sabin was calling out. We cannot have the Chairperson asking for the Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings to be followed while through the time that you were making your very good and well-reasoned ruling a junior Government member was speaking loudly.
Robertson H V Ross: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17998. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Order! There is too much barracking and this is not a football field. It is the people’s House and members will conduct themselves with respect for the traditions of the House as enshrined in the Standing Orders. That is why I am standing. I represent those Standing Orders and I crave your respect for them and your understanding. I am sorry Ms Ardern. Your time has finished.
Roy Eric: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17995. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): Jacinda Ardern’s amendment to clause 35 is out of order as it is substantially the same as Jan Logie’s amendment which has just been defeated.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jacinda Ardern to clause 36 be agreed to:in subclause (2)(a)(ii) replace “$2200” with “$3120”.
Auchinvole Chris: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAuchinvole Chris: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17995. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National): I moveThat the question be now put.
O'Connor Simon: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17994. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I moveThat the question be now put.
Barry Maggie: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarry Maggie: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17993. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): I moveThat the question be now put.
Ross Jami-Lee: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17991. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Roy Eric: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17983. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): When the Committee was suspended last night Jacinda Ardern had the call. She has about 2¾ minutes.
UrgencyText is subject to correctionUrgency[Sitting date: 06 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17508. Text is subject to correction.]UrgencyHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I moveThat urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Psychoactive Substances Amendment Bill. The Government has determined after careful consideration that this bill be progressed through all stages under urgency to address an immediate public health concern. This piece of legislation will immediately remove all interim approved psychoactive products from the market.It is not so long ago that we passed the Psychoactive Substances Bill. It passed through the House with 119 votes supporting it and I think the general hope from MPs was that this scourge on our society would be better contained if we were to have the legislation that was proposed. Things move on and I think it is a tribute to the whole Parliament that in the last few days there has been a considerable amount of work and effort from all sides of the House to get a bill to the House today that can be once again broadly supported.I think the work that the Hon Tony Ryall has done on behalf of Peter Dunne in the last couple of days has got us to a point where we can be confident that once this bill is passed we are as sure as we can be about removing all of this horrible product from the market. I am sure that there will be opportunities in the future for the House to continue considering this because there will always be people who want to put these sorts ofsubstances in the road of those who believe they need them as part of their life. With those few comments I move the motion.A party vote was called for on the questionThat urgency be accorded.Ayes106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes15Green Party 14; Mana 1.Motion agreed to.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9878. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the Education Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1.Noes57New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Bill read a second time.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9878. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the question be agreed to.Ayes63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1.Noes57New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Question agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9909. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): From my reckoning the Green Party has used the four calls it has been allocated in this 3-hour debate. If you are getting a call from another party that has been allocated to you by negotiation that is fine. But at this stage your party has had four calls.Metiria Turei: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Yes I understand that we have been allocated calls at least from Mana and our records indicate that we are entitled to five at this stage—and Brendan Horan’s call.The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Is that five—Metiria Turei: Six including Brendan Horan’s.The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Well I have four including Mana’s call so I will look at that. At this stage if you were to take the Mana call I would accept that if Catherine Delahunty wishes to take the call. Before you start we will check out whether you actually have six in total including Mana’s call but at this stage I call Catherine Delahunty.
Roy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9891. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): I note that the Greens are seeking the call. Speaker’s rulings 16/3 and 16/5 expressly forbid the displaying of any slogans in the House and no Green member will get a call while that is there.
Roy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9886. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): I believe the next subject of interest is the Education and Science Committee’s report on the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd. The question is that the report be noted.
Roy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9884. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): I do have another National member if someone is seeking the call.Simon O’Connor: Mr Chairman.The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): Simon O’Connor. Sorry I am not trying to lead members but I do have a script here and I am just making sure that we—I gave similar encouragement to this side of the Chamber. There is no favouritism here.Tim Macindoe: We thought there was a Labour call.The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): So did I at one point. I call Simon O’Connor.
Roy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9879. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): I am so sorry to interrupt the member. He will be able to conclude his call at 7.30 p.m. when I resume the Chair for now is the time for the dinner adjournment.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.Report noted.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFlavell Te Ururoa: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9879. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki):Tēnā koe. In the short time I have got available I did want to put a Māori Party point of view and that is that it was pretty disappointing to read the report of the Commerce Committee about 2011-12 and see the extent of the 2011-12 performance summarised in one sentence: “no matters to bring to the attention of the House.” That is what the committee said: “no matters to bring to the attention of the House.” With that the report of the New Zealand Tourism Board presented on 9 November last year and the deliberations of the committee on 6 December are now on record as comprising no matters for our attention.I have to say that one would have expected a little bit more from the committee. I mean I would love to see this House debating a whole range of issues including the current tourism focus which has been on the “100% Pure New Zealand” brand. That is great. It reflects our environmental values a concept central to Māori Party psyche and what we commonly call kaitiakitanga. But I wonder what consideration has been given to for example the unique value of our cultural tourism in Aotearoa. What indeed has been given to nurture our Māori operators in the tourism industry?Sometimes I think that we need to challenge ourselves about the things we do as a country by not recognising some of the things that are actually right under our noses. In that regard I am talking about things Māori. This was discussed I think by a woman by the name of Pania Tyson-Nathan when she at the recent Trenz event encouraged tourism operators and said that Māori tourism is not about just entertainment value. Māori culture and the tourism product are important to our economy and to the cultural social and psychological frame of our country.Tourism is an industry where Māori are moving up the management chain from being just performers in the old days to managers owners and entrepreneurs and are developing Māori models of tourism business collaborating off the leverage of the Māori edge and integrating—
Roy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9879. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): The House is in Committee for consideration of the performance in 2011-12 and current operation of Crown entities public organisations and State enterprises. The debate on the performance of Crown entities public organisations and State enterprises is a series of debates on the individual financial reviews of Crown entities public organisations and State enterprises as reported by select committees. A total of 3 hours is dedicated for this debate. The debates on the individual financial reviews should be relevant to their performance in the 2011-12 financial year and their current operations and any member may have no more than two calls on each financial review. The financial reviews available for debate are available on the Table. Reports on entities that are not yet reported cannot be debated. I understand members have indicated the Crown entities public organisations and State enterprises that they wish to debate and I understand the first entity members wish to debate is the New Zealand Tourism Board.
Tisch Lindsay: Education Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9874. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I understand the next call is a split call.
Tisch Lindsay: Education Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9873. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Sorry to interrupt the honourable member. Her time has expired.
Brownlee Gerry: Offices of Parliament — Address to Governor-GeneralText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Offices of Parliament — Address to Governor-General[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):I move That a respectful Address be presented to His Excellency the Governor-General commending to His Excellency the alterations to the appropriations for the 2012/13 financial year in respect of Vote Audit Vote Ombudsmen and Vote Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and the appropriations and information for the 2013/14 financial year in respect of Vote Audit Vote Ombudsmen and Vote Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. These three officers are in fact Officers of Parliament and do have some high degree of—or in fact total—statutory independence. The Controller and Auditor-General is the position currently held by Lyn Provost. She has held that position since October 2009. It is the Public Audit Act 2001 that gives that person the authority to effectively be the public’s person looking at the probity of all public expenditure—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Put some heart behind it.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: —in New Zealand and that includes local government expenditure as well. Members are extolling me to be a little more excited in my speech this afternoon. I would be—I would be—but when it comes to the Auditor-General there is a degree of dignity about that office that does need to be respected and I am not going to fall into the trap posed for me this afternoon by the Rt Hon Winston Peters who has a great deal of respect for the Office of the Auditor-General and for that matter Mr Grant Robertson on the other side who is only just now learning what that office is.One of the other groups here is the Ombudsman. Currently there are a number of people holding that office and have done so on behalf of the people of New Zealand since 1962. They continue to do good work making sure that the Government of the day or other agencies of Government are able to be accessible to New Zealanders.Finally the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Dr Jan Wright has been in that position since 5 March 2007. She was reappointed for a second term in 2012 and continues to be a watchdog for the people of New Zealand when it comes to environmental matters. Some of her work although at times controversial and at times challenging to some people is absolutely necessary and she does a great job.There are two changes to Vote Audit: a $35000 increase in the permanent legislative authority baseline arising from a determination by the Remuneration Authority; and a decrease of $181000 resulting from an updated forecast for the revenue-dependent appropriation of audit and assurance services. In the cases of the other officers there are small alterations that I do not think are necessary to mention this afternoon. There are both increases and some decreases as well. All of those by and large come from Remuneration Authority determinations. I commend the motion to the House.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Skycity Convention Centre—Terms of Agreement and Legislative ImplicationsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Skycity Convention Centre—Terms of Agreement and Legislative Implications[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: That is exactly right.
Turei Metiria: Urgent Debates Declined — Skycity Convention Centre—Terms of Agreement and Legislative ImplicationsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Urgent Debates Declined — Skycity Convention Centre—Terms of Agreement and Legislative Implications[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can I just get some clarity on your decision? Is your decision to decline this application on the basis that legislation may in time come before the House and therefore a debate on the issue can occur then? Is that part of the test that you have applied?
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Skycity Convention Centre—Terms of Agreement and Legislative ImplicationsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Skycity Convention Centre—Terms of Agreement and Legislative Implications[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from Metiria Turei seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the agreement between the Crown and Skycity concerning the construction of a convention centre and various regulatory concessions. The announcement is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. A heads of agreement has been signed and a final agreement is expected to be reached in June. It will require legislation to give it effect. Where a matter will come before the House reasonably soon in the form of legislation that is a relevant consideration in considering whether it requires the immediate attention of the House. The test for an urgent debate is a high one. Given that a final agreement is not yet in place and it will require legislation I am not convinced that I would be justified in setting aside the business of the House today. There will be other occasions on which the House can debate this matter. The application is therefore declined.
O'Rourke Denis: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First)to the Minister of Immigration: Does he agree that there should be a cap on the number of older immigrants; if not why not?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Immigration):Yes I do. That is why there is a limit to the number of older migrants able to be approved for residence each year under the capped family stream.Denis O’Rourke: How can the Government have a sustainable immigration policy when last year 49.5 percent of all immigrants were reunification migrants as reported on 23 April this year by Lincoln Tan in the New Zealand Herald?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I cannot verify that 49 percent figure. However I do note that the same newspaper published this: “Professor Spoonley said ‘being more generous’ with family migration would encourage more skilled migrants to come and remain here and he did not agree parents were a burden to New Zealand.”Denis O’Rourke: Will the Minister verify that nearly 40 percent of immigrants from China last year were 50 years of age or more as reported in Lincoln Tan’s article in the New Zealand Herald?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I cannot exactly verify it. It could well be correct. But what I would note also is that the average age of permanent migrants to New Zealand is 29 compared with the general population’s age of 36. So overall there is a very young cohort of migrants coming to this country.Denis O’Rourke: Does the Minister agree with Professor Spoonley that the ratio of all reunification migrants should be maintained at no more than two-thirds of skilled migrants?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I think that is an oversimplification of the issue. As I have mentioned to the member in this House on a previous occasion the number of parent category migrants is a function of the skilled migrant numbers 5 to 10 years ago so it would be very difficult to maintain a strict fixed proportion of one over the other.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South)to the Minister of Police: Does she have confidence in the Police?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Police):Absolutely. The police are doing an outstanding job of protecting our community but are always looking at how they can do things better. Crime has fallen nearly 17 percent in the last 3 years and recorded crime is at a 24-year low. We now have more police in the right places at the right time with the right tools working hard to stop crime before it occurs. As a result public trust and confidence are at an all-time high reaching 87 percent last month.Hon Trevor Mallard: Does the Minister support the comments made in the eulogy to the late Detective Inspector Bruce Hutton by the Deputy Police Commissioner Mike Bush including the comment that Inspector Hutton was a man of “great character”?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I understand that those comments were read from Mr Hutton’s service record and that was an appropriate action to take at the man’s funeral in front of his family and friends.Hon Trevor Mallard: Can I therefore take it that the Minister thinks it is appropriate that the Deputy Commissioner of Police describes the individual who a royal commission found planted evidence in the Crewe murder case as being of “great character”?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: No that is not what I said. In fact I thought I said very clearly that those words were read from Detective Hutton’s service record. They were not the opinion of the deputy commissioner; my understanding is they were on the man’s record prior to the Arthur Allan Thomas case.Hon Trevor Mallard: Will she rule out supporting Mike Bush as a candidate for the soon to be vacant police commissioner’s position in light of his appalling judgment in reading those comments out in that eulogy?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: We currently have a commissioner and it would be inappropriate for any politician at any stage to make any comments about the future employment of any of our outstanding police commissioners. I am amazed that that member would sully the name of the one of the top serving police officers in this country.
Lee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.MELISSA LEE (National)to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made to provide extra funding in Budget 2013 to support Budgeting Services?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development):As part of Budget 2013 we are supporting people on low incomes by investing more money into organisations providing budgeting advice and support. An extra $1.5 million has been allocated for 2013-14. This is in addition to the funding that has already been allocated and it will relieve pressure on this sector in the short term.Melissa Lee: How can budgeting services apply for this extra funding?Hon PAULA BENNETT: This extra funding is in recognition of the good work that budgeting services do and is being allocated to address demand in service provision. Applications opened yesterday Monday 13 May and close on Friday 24 May with providers being notified by the end of the month. It is a short 2-page form that all should be able to easily fill out and I encourage people to put in their applications.Melissa Lee: What will the strategic review look at?Hon PAULA BENNETT: A strategic review of the overall funding model will be completed this year with a view to implementing a sustainable funding path from July 2014. We are in the process of scoping the review but I think it is a good idea to look at policy decisions ensure we are getting the changes and the desired effects intended and look carefully at the consequence of policy decisions on individuals Governments and our partner NGOs.
Walker Holly: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWalker Holly: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.HOLLY WALKER (Green)to the Minister of Justice: Does she intend to bring legislation to the House that will implement the recommendations of the MMP Review in time for the 2014 election?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice):No.Holly Walker: Why did she bother to hold the MMP review if she had no intention of implementing its recommendations in the time line intended?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Of course I did not hold the MMP review; that was a matter that was undertaken by the Electoral Commission. But I can also say that I have made it very clear that we need consensus on these matters for any change and there is no consensus for any change.Holly Walker: Given that 77 percent of the public submissions to the review and 52 percent of the general public support abolishing the one-seat threshold how can she justify leaving this hugely unpopular coat-tailing rule in place for the next election?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I believe that Dr Holly Walker was correct on this matter when she wrote: “There is a tradition of legislation making changes to the electoral system being passed unanimously in Parliament and it would be great if all parties were able to put aside their own short-term political interests and build a consensus around the Electoral Commission’s report.” Dr Walker wrote that on 6 November last year in a little-read blog called Frogblog and I agree with her.Holly Walker: Thank you for the promotion—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member like to start her question again.Holly Walker: Thanks for the promotion Minister. Which party or parties have blocked consensus in Parliament on the recommendations of the MMP review?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Actually no party has been able to reach consensus because consensus actually requires all parties to agree.
Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeArdern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.JACINDA ARDERN (Labour)to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement at the start of the year that “there will be—and there are—isolated examples that are reported of a child being hungry”; if so what does he consider to be “isolated”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):Yes. There are examples of children being hungry at school but not every child.Jacinda Ardern: Does he stand by his statement in response to Labour’s proposal to introduce food in schools that it was unnecessary because “The vast overwhelming bulk are [fed] in New Zealand”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes.Jacinda Ardern: How does he reconcile his position that kids are being fed and the problem is isolated with his position 6 years ago that hungry children in schools was “a major issue” when since then and since he has been in office material deprivation and the number of families struggling to put food on the table has gone from 15 percent to 21 percent?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: On a number of fronts. Firstly the Government has made changes to the Fruit in Schools programme to mean that it is more efficient. Secondly the Government has put more money into KidsCan to ensure that there are breakfasts. Thirdly the Government has supported Fonterra which has been running a food in schools programme. If one was to look at say Fonterra’s programme as an example my understanding is that it is in all the decile 1 to 4 schools around the country that want it. It operates 2 days a week. It basically feeds about 566 schools. That represents about a fifth of the number of schools in New Zealand. Only about 15 percent of children actually actively participate in those programmes. So if you extrapolate all those numbers very approximately that is about 3 percent of New Zealand kids.Jacinda Ardern: Does he stand by his position as Opposition leader on food in schools when he said that “We’re going to put together the package while in Opposition. We are not waiting to be in Government because all kids deserve the best.”; if so what was the nature of that package that he claims to have put together?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes and we have been doing a number of things. As I just outlined before they are some of the examples around food. But actually as the Minister of Housing just announced before we are going to be extending a number of the three-bedroom State houses in Auckland to four bedrooms. We have insulated 230000 homes. We have been rolling out a programme on rheumatic fever working very closely with the Māori Party in terms of the Ministerial Committee on Poverty. All of these issues are issues that lead to the well-being of youngsters.Jacinda Ardern: Is he satisfied that all that needs to be done on food in schools is complete or will he introduce a package as part of his Budget?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Oh the member will have to wait a couple more sleeps.
Mitchell Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney)to the Minister for Economic Development: How is the Government encouraging investment tourism and job growth in Auckland?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development):The Government is working hard in many ways to encourage investment in jobs and growth. Yesterday morning I announced that the Government has signed a heads of agreement with Skycity to build a $402 million international-sized convention centre in Auckland. An international convention centre will enable Auckland and New Zealand to tap into the lucrative convention centre market attracting an estimated 33000 conference delegates each year and significant spin-offs for the local and national economy. The convention centre which will be capable of holding 3500 delegates at one time is expected to employ 1000 people in construction and there will be a further 800 jobs once it is up and running.Mark Mitchell: What concessions in harm minimisation and anti - money-laundering measures have been agreed to?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: In return for Skycity’s fully funding the $402 million project costs the Government has agreed to extend Skycity’s Auckland casino licence due for renewal in 2021 to 2048 provided it operates within its licensing requirements. There will be 230 new pokie machines—which incidentally is the same number granted under the previous Government for a convention centre one-quarter of the size—40 gaming tables and 12 gaming tables that may be swapped for automated gaming tables allowing up to 17 percent of gaming machines in restricted areas to accept notes of greater value than $20; and the introduction of ticket-in ticket-out cashless gaming like in Australia. Identification will be required when any amount over $500 is being loaded on to ticket-in ticket-out tickets in non-restricted areas. There will also be voluntary pre-commitment systems—a modelling tool to identify players at risk of problem gambling—and double the number of host responsibility staff at the casino.Mark Mitchell: How does the agreement compare with other convention centre agreements?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Very well. To contrast this agreement with another convention centre deal made under a Labour Government in 2001 that deal also involved 230 pokie machines in exchange for a convention centre but it was a teensy-weensy bit smaller than the current one—in fact a quarter of the size. The interesting thing about that deal of course was that it was struck under the previous Labour Government. It did have a number of very strong supporters. One of the most vocal supporters was pleased to see continuing investment in the quality of our tourism infrastructure—that was one Helen Clark—and one of the most silent opponents to that arrangement was the Green Party which set up zero petitions against it and made zero threats to overturn the agreement that Labour set up.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: That is certainly not a valid point of order. If the member is seeking leave the easiest way of resolving it—members have a right to seek leave for just about anything in this House. The member has sought leave to transfer the question to the Prime Minister. Is there any objection? There is.Hon Trevor Mallard: Chicken!Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will stand and withdraw that remark.Hon Trevor Mallard: I withdraw.
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This question was originally set down for the Prime Minister and given the notoriously poor communication between Mr Joyce and the Prime Minister I seek leave for the question to be answered by the Prime Minister.