edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Carter David: Urgent Debates — Student Achievement—OECD ReportText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates — Student Achievement—OECD Report[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15213. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from Chris Hipkins seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the release of the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment 2012 data collection on the performance of school students in reading literacy maths and science. The release of the results is a particular case of recent occurrence. As an OECD study there is no ministerial responsibility for the data released but they deal with matters involving ministerial responsibility. The results confirm a gradual decline in performance and echo findings from earlier studies. Although that may represent an existing situation the release of the OECD results is a significant new occurrence of considerable public interest. Educational achievement is of fundamental importance. The public need confidence in the Government’s response and its education plan focus on a number of fronts to lift educational achievement in order to give all young people a better education. I consider it important enough to warrant the immediate attention of the House by way of an urgent debate.
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15208. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) to theMinister of Defence: How have recent New Zealand Defence Force exercises contributed toward the Government’s goal of developing a Joint Amphibious Task Force?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Defence): The New Zealand Defence Force recently completed Exercise SouthernKatipō one of the largest military exercises ever conducted—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I just need to stop the family chatter that is occurring between both sides of the House. Could the Minister please start his answer again?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The New Zealand Defence Force recently completed Exercise SouthernKatipō one of the largest military exercises ever conducted in New Zealand. This involved 2200 military personnel from 10 countries. The exercise tested the New Zealand Defence Force’s ability to mount a medium-scale amphibious operation involving maritime land and air assets. I am pleased to advise the House that the exercise demonstrated that the New Zealand Defence Force has made great progress in building amphibious capability and remains on track to have a fully operational joint amphibious task force by 2015.Jacqui Dean: What is the value to New Zealand in the New Zealand Defence Force developing a joint amphibious task force?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: TheDefence White Paper 2010 placed a greater focus on security within our own region. Accordingly the Defence Force turned its focus towards developing the capability to deliver humanitarian assistance and respond to security situations in the South-west Pacific. The ability to deploy land forces across large stretches of ocean by sea or by air and sustain those forces once there is therefore crucial to the New Zealand Defence Force.Jacqui Dean: What capability upgrades has the Government invested in to help deliver the joint amphibious task force?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Recognising that amphibious operations would require strength and capabilities the Government has committed to a number of capability purchases including a new fleet of medium and heavy operational vehicles capable of being deployed in medium and high threat environments and an increased number of upgraded Seasprite helicopters with a range of upgraded avionics communications radars weapons and other systems on board that are superior to the existing fleet.
Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHeatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15205. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.Hon PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) to theAssociate Minister for Social Development: How is the enhanced information sharing between the Ministry of Social Development and Inland Revenue delivering on the Government’s promise to crack down on welfare fraud?Hon CHESTER BORROWS (Associate Minister for Social Development): Our enhanced information-sharing between the Inland Revenue Department and the Ministry of Social Development is working well. Since it began in March this year the ministry has identified and put a stop to more than 5300 benefits that people were not entitled to and corrected another 3000 who were not receiving correct support. Those 5300 were costing the taxpayer a bare minimum of $56 million per year. Although it is great to see these people getting back into work they should not have been taking money they were no longer entitled to.Hon Phil Heatley: How does this enhanced information-sharing fit with other new measures the Government has introduced to prevent detect and punish welfare fraud?Hon CHESTER BORROWS: The key aim of the package of reforms that this Government introduced earlier this year is to stop welfare fraud as soon as possible. I am pleased with the results of our information sharing as it is allowing us to catch fraud we might otherwise have missed and stop illegitimate benefits early before the debt really mounts up. This perfectly complements other preventive measures such as streamlined investigation processes greater scrutiny of beneficiaries who have previously ripped us off and providing follow-up support to new sole parent support beneficiaries.Hon Phil Heatley: What is the intention behind trialling home visits to check in with new beneficiaries receiving sole parent support?Hon CHESTER BORROWS: We recognise that for those receiving a benefit dependent on their relationship status navigating the benefit rules can be challenging. Although most do it successfully those who do not end up taking money that they are not entitled to and can be left with a massive debt and a fraud conviction at the end of the process. The intention behind trialling a number of methods of contact including offering to meet at their home is to look at the best way to keep in touch with sole parent beneficiaries at a time when we know that their circumstances frequently change at 14 weeks to 16 weeks after starting to receive the benefit. There is no sinister intent. This should be a check-in and not a checking-up.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15205. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) to theMinister of Health: What improvements in health services are shown in the latest health targets results?Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health): The latest health targets results have recently been published and they show continuing improvement with record numbers of patients benefiting from surgery and 91 percent of 8-month-olds immunised. These improvements in getting elective surgery mean that over the last 5 years on average 8000 more patients a year have been treated. These latest results also show that 93 percent of emergency department patients were seen treated or discharged within 6 hours. This is the best winter emergency department result since the targets began. These better health services are the result of the hard work of our health professionals helped by the average extra $500 million a year this Government has invested into our public health service.Dr Paul Hutchison: What reports has he received on emergency department patients benefiting from information technology advances?Hon TONY RYALL: There are some exciting information technology advances that are improving emergency department clinicians’ ability to provide better patient care. In the Wairarapa District Health Board the Waikato District Health Board and the Canterbury District Health Board with the patient’s permission emergency department clinicians are able to access a summary of the patient’s primary-care information held by their general practitioner. This includes the medicines they are on their lab results and any other problems the patient may have. This technology gives the emergency department clinicians the opportunity to act much more quickly knowing they have up-to-date data they can trust and more important the patient does not have to tell their story umpteen times to every clinician they meet.Hon Annette King: In light of that answer and if there are such positive results by district health boards in meeting his health targets why has he dumped the chair of the Canterbury District Health Board Mr Bruce Matheson whom people in the district thought was doing an excellent job and is it because the relationship with him has been tested by Mr Matheson’s strong advocacy for the people and services in Canterbury?Hon TONY RYALL: No.Hon Annette King: I seek leave to table a document from the Canterbury District Health Board from board papers public excluded which states the relationship with Wellington has been tested—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The document has been well described. Leave is sought to table that particular document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
O'Connor Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15204. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to theMinister of Science and Innovation: What steps is the Government taking to improve the understanding skills and adoption of science and technology in New Zealand society?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Science and Innovation): The Government’s view is that science is vital for New Zealand’s future. We have of course increased total funding for science innovation and research across the Government to $1.36 billion. Along the way we have established Callaghan Innovation committed $278 million just this year for 51 new projects in science investment and committed just under half a billion dollars for 10 National Science Challenges. The National Science Challenges panel recommended a further special challenge to improve New Zealand’s understanding and appreciation of science and last week the Minister of Education and I announced the Science and Society project to lift achievement in maths and science plus science literacy across New Zealand.Simon O’Connor: What steps is the Government taking to lift achievement by young people in maths and science?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: As the latest Programme for International Student Assessment results demonstrate it is critical that we keep improving the understanding of science and technology in this country and improve young New Zealanders’ skills in this area. New Zealand needs more young people with science technology engineering and maths skills in our workforce to help us be internationally competitive and to meet our future labour market needs. As part of the first phase of the Science and Society project last week Minister Parata and I announced that the Government has committed $10.5 million in additional funding for schools to raise student achievement in maths and science. Also more than half a million dollars is going into the development of more than 60 science learning resources.Simon O’Connor: What are the objectives of the Science and Society project?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Science and Society project is a unique venture between the science sector and the education sector to lift achievement in science technology engineering and maths subjects and also raise New Zealanders’ science literacy more generally. [Interruption] Of course there are some people we cannot help and they are on the other side of the House. Aside from improving young New Zealanders’ science skills we also need to improve science literacy right across the population. A 2010ACNielsen survey showed that although public trust in science and support for science funding is healthy a lot of people have a low appreciation of the benefits of science and the Science and Society project will coordinate efforts across Government to lift our literacy. The Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor Sir PeterGluckman will chair the reference group of experts to advise officials and Ministers.
Carter David: Business of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Business of the House[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
Brownlee Gerry: Business of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Business of the House[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): Following discussions in the Business Committee I seek leave for there to be no general debate on 11 December 2013. I understand that later that day there will be an adjournment debate in which members should be able to traverse most of the matters that might be covered in a general debate.
Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSittings of the House[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15284. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Sittings of the HouseTIM MACINDOE (Junior Whip—National): As it is 1½ minutes to 10 and we have made good progress tonight I seek leave for the House to rise at this point.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? There is not. Leave is granted.
Business of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness of the House[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Wednesday 4 December 2013Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Business of the HouseHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): Following discussions in the Business Committee I seek leave for there to be no general debate on 11 December 2013. I understand that later that day there will be an adjournment debate in which members should be able to traverse most of the matters that might be covered in a general debate.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
Vote: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat Part 2 be agreed to.Ayes64New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes55New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Part 2 agreed to.Progress to be reported presently.House resumed.The Chairperson reported the Consumer Law Reform Bill with amendment and that the Committee had divided it into six bills and progress on the Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill.Report adopted.
Vote: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes55New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Noes64New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Amendments not agreed to.
Vote: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes64New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes55New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 35 in the name of Tracey Martin to Part 2 be agreed to.
Ross Jami-Lee: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Ross Jami-Lee: Consumer Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Consumer Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15187. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Papers 273 and 404 in the name of the Hon Craig Foss be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Parts 1 and 2 schedules 1 to 3 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.The Committee divided the bill into the Fair Trading Amendment Bill the Consumer Guarantees Amendment Bill the Weights and Measures Amendment Bill the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Amendment Bill the Carriage of Goods Amendment Bill and the Auctioneers Billpursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 405.
Tisch Lindsay: Consumer Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Consumer Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15174. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for there to be one question on the Consumer Law Reform Bill. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Macindoe Tim: Consumer Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Consumer Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15173. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (Junior Whip—National): I seek leave for the Committee to take the parts schedules and clauses of the Consumer Law Reform Bill as one question.
Macindoe Tim: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15173. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): The Harmful Digital Communications Bill is an important measure dealing with contemporary issues of widespread and significant public concern. I want to acknowledge and thank the Minister of Justice for the energy that she has shown in bringing this measure to the House. I know it is widely welcomed by the community at large who are concerned about these matters. I want to thank all members for the intelligent contributions that they have made in this first reading debate and I wish the Justice and Electoral Committee members well with their deliberations on it.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Justice and Electoral Committee.
Roy Eric: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15172. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member’s time has expired.
Roy Eric: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15171. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Raymond Huo 5 minutes.
Ngaro Alfred: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNgaro Alfred: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15171. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALFRED NGARO (National): I rise to take just a brief call to note the support of all of the House for this Harmful Digital Communications Bill. As the member Clare Curran has just been talking about it is important to note that bullying is an attitudinal thing. It is a behavioural issue where people decide that they want to impose their power and control issues on others. We know from the many cases around cyber-bullying the impact that this has had.What I am looking forward to as part of the Justice and Electoral Committee is hearing some of the submissions. One thing I would like to say to those who are out there in the communities and listening tonight is that we want to try to encourage more young people to come forward. We know that when we went out withGreen Paper for Vulnerable Children over 10000 submissions were heard. There were a number—almost 2000—that came from young people. We would like to see a similar approach taken for this bill. We are keen to see that they would do that. It is one of our priorities to deliver better public services but more important is to protect people from harm and particularly protect them from cyber-bullying.This bill will approve an agency to become the first port of call for complaints. We think that this bill is actually a bill that will get a lot of interest. We are looking forward to the connections with our community and to hearing its concerns and also to hearing some solutions around that. I want to commend this bill to the House and support its first reading. Thank you.
Barry Maggie: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarry Maggie: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15169. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): I rise to take a short call on the Harmful Digital Communications Bill at its first reading. This is a bill in the name of the Hon Judith Collins. There has been a lot of discussion about cyber-bullying through society in New Zealand for probably the last 2 to 3 years and it is a very serious issue. The Law Commission has done some excellent work in this space. Its reportThe News Media meets ‘New Media’ has been a document that has been helpful to the Hon Judith Collins in drawing up this bill.Essentially the bill creates a set of 10 communication principles that will guide an approved agency and the courts. It is all very well to talk about digital bullying and cyber-bullying and so forth but it needs to be clearly defined. I think that the principle of creating an approved agency creating a new civil enforcement regime which includes appointing an approved agency as the first port of call for complaints is also useful because vexatious complaints will occur in this space and it does need to be filtered. That agency will be able then to investigate and resolve complaints directly and quickly and the most serious complaints will be referred to the District Court. Those I think are excellent measures.I will take this up in more detail at a further reading. In the select committee process aspects of this bill will be formalised and it will emerge as a very strong and apparently well-supported piece of legislation. I will not waste the time of the House by doing what the Green member did which was to take cheap shots at other parliamentary colleagues. I will leave it at that and commend this bill to the House.
Wilkinson Kate: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilkinson Kate: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15166. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon KATE WILKINSON (National—Waimakariri): It is a pleasure to take a short call on the first reading of the Harmful Digital Communications Bill. We have heard that the purpose of this bill is to mitigate the harm caused to people by digital communications and to provide the victims of that communication with a quick and efficient means of redress. It makes it an offence to send messages and post material that is harmful online and it is punishable by 3 months’ imprisonment or a $2000 fine.I think it is especially important that we encourage our young people to make submissions on this bill because we have already heard that the Law Commission found that one in 10 New Zealanders has experienced harmful communications on the internet and that number doubles for those between the ages of 19 and 29. Otherresearch has shown that one in five New Zealand high school students has experienced some form of cyber-bullying or harassment. Frankly that is not acceptable and it certainly would be our wish that as many young people as possible can actually submit on this bill so that their views can be known. This is about sending a strong message to those who continue to harass and harm others online. Time is up for them. I commend this bill to the House and I commend it to the Justice and Electoral Committee for detailed submissions.
Finlayson Christopher: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFinlayson Christopher: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15164. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) on behalf of theMinister of Local Government: I moveThat the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) be reported back to the House by 12 May 2014.Motion agreed to.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15164. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a first time.Ayes104New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 33; New Zealand First 7; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes14Green Party 13; Mana 1.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.
Macindoe Tim: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15164. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I support the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3).Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry?TIM MACINDOE: I support this bill.
Beaumont Carol: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBeaumont Carol: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15162. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour): I intend to take a very short call on this bill the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) but I think my colleague Iain Lees-Galloway has summed up our approach. Although we are supporting the bill weare wary—very very wary. There is a lot of language in this bill that causes us concern particularly around the issue of consultation. It seems to us that this bill will erode the consultation that councils have with ratepayers by repealing most requirements to use the prescribed formal process when consulting under the Local Government Act 2002. The question we ask ourselves is why the Government wishes to scrap that provision. Local government plays an incredibly important role. The fact is that most New Zealanders probably do not understand just how significant its role is. Local authorities make up 4 percent of our gross domestic product and manage nearly $100 billion worth of public assets. Those assets are essential services like water and waste water important regulatory functions for households and businesses as well as a range of community facilities and community development provisions. It is very significant yet our local government elections showed recently a lack of understanding of that importance. We are concerned that reducing consultation provisions can only make that worse.I suppose I would also just reinforce the concerns that Iain Lees-Galloway has mentioned about development charges and what the implications of those are. To conclude we are wary because we see this bill in the context of so many other actions by this Government in relation to local government where it has an attitude of being patronising and an attitude of undermining local government democracy. So we will be scrutinising and listening to submissions very very carefully. Thank you.
Goldsmith Paul: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoldsmith Paul: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15160. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): It is my pleasure to speak briefly on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) because we do want to advance the programme. It builds on the first phase of National’s Better Local Government reform programme. The first phase is focused on local government’s core roles streamlining local authority reorganisation procedures and making councils more fiscally responsible. New Zealand’s 78 councils make up 4 percent of the economy but they also spend $7.5 billion of public money each year and manage $100 billion worth of assets. It is crucial that we do this as efficiently as possible and have good governance arrangements.Since 2002 when councils’ roles were expanded councils’ debt has quadrupled. In Auckland where I live the Auckland Council’s debt projections are truly terrifying. Councils must be able to play their part in economic growth but we do need to maintain a system that reduces red tape not grows it that minimises the rate burdens on households and businesses and that limits debt while providing high quality infrastructure. This second tranche of reforms is aimed at doing that and on that basis I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.
Barry Maggie: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarry Maggie: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15157. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): I rise to speak to the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) in its first reading. As has been noted by other speakers this bill gives effect to the second phase of National’s Better Local Government reforms and although the Opposition does not like it local government as with central government as with every household in this country needs to deliver better services within budget. We are under tight fiscal constraints—that is true. We have seen with the Kaipara District Council the worst example of its kind—profligate spending and improper scrutiny of what was going on there—and it was a problem that became worse and worse. This kind of legislation will put paid to that sort of thing.This is a bill that includes provisions for extending the local boards governance model outside Auckland. Where I live and I represent the people of the North Shore the local boards work very well. I do not share the Opposition’s contempt for them or their condescension around their ability to make key decisions that are community-led and community-based. I think that democracy works very well and when people are elected they represent people and at a local board level the model works very well. In Devonport and Takapuna where I live I think that a lot of the people who are on that local board would take great exception to the utterances of the speaker Eugenie Sage who has just sat down.As with the first phase of the local government reforms—Hon Anne Tolley: If they’ve listened.MAGGIE BARRY: Yes indeed if they have listened which of course they will not have because they are the Greens and they never listen to anyone who thinks differently from the way they do. But as with the first phase of local government reforms any reorganisation of local government has to be community-led. This is a bill that is going to encourage greater collaboration and shared services between local authorities. It is a bill that will also provide councils with more flexibility and clarity about how and when to consult. There is not in my view a downside to that. This Government wants to work with local government to deliver efficient and affordable local government services for New Zealand families and I commend this bill to the House.
O'Connor Simon: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15148. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I will take just a short call on this bill the Land Transport Amendment Bill mainly in retort to a couple of the thoughts expressed. From the Green Party it does sound like the key around stopping drink-driving is to ban roads. Maybe that is a step forward. We hear from the Labour Party members that they had an epiphany around drink-driving one day after 9 years in Government. And we hear from New Zealand First—Hon Annette King: That’s rubbish—total rubbish and you know it.SIMON O’CONNOR: Oh yes we have excited them. We have excited them now. We have livened them up.We are pleased that this bill has the widespread support of the House. We are looking forward to working with David Bennett in the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and in the House. Thank you.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee.
Roy Eric: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15146. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Gareth Hughes—10 minutes.Gareth Hughes: Ten minutes? Five.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry 5 minutes. Testing.
Roy Eric: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15145. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Five minutes—Carol Beaumont.
Calder Cam: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCalder Cam: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15145. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr CAM CALDER (National): This bill the Land Transport Amendment Bill will lower the legal blood-alcohol limit. That will make our roads safer. I wholeheartedly support this bill.
Auchinvole Chris: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAuchinvole Chris: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15143. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National): This bill the Land Transport Amendment Bill will make our roads safer while still allowing people to socialise responsibly. We should pass this bill. Thank you.
Sabin Mike: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSabin Mike: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15141. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MIKE SABIN (National—Northland): It is good to see that the Land Transport Amendment Bill is enjoying good support. It is a very important bill. Of course there have been some comments about delay as we generally expect when there is support of this nature. The reality is that there have been some significant reforms going on in this space over a number of years now—in the whole alcohol and drugs space. There has certainly been a lot of work and research looking at this particular nexus between the 0.05 and the 0.08 level as it relates to drivers on the road. One thing that we have been able to establish is that there is a relatively small group of people who fall into that category. With all legislation whether or not it is for matters like this it is about sending messages but achieving balance in doing so. There is always the risk that the sledgehammer is used to crack the walnut and there is also the risk that if we do not send stern enough messages we essentially empower or engage the community to disregard the dangers and the consequences of their actions in matters like this.One thing that we know is that swiftness and certainty play a very significant role in deterrence. Ultimately just because there is a limit—and the member Kevin Hague raised a very good point as to why the level should not be zero as we have with youth—and because someone can drive with an element of alcohol it does not mean it is a good idea and it does not mean that they actually have to. It is still up to the individual to make a responsible call about whether it is appropriate in their view. That is where we come back to setting the messages and putting the levers in place to try to get that balance right. One thing is for sure and that is that 86 percent of the population in New Zealand consumes alcohol and there is a large number of people who have issues with it. But there are far greater numbers of people who actually do not and we need to consider them in the mix when we are passing legislation and getting that balance right.I am looking forward to the discussion on this bill. I think it will be an interesting piece of legislation to work on. I certainly encourage people to make submissions. Thank you.
Robertson H V Ross: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15136. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I call the honourable member David Bennett.
Brownlee Gerry: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Land Transport Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15134. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Transport): I moveThat the Land Transport Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I further nominate that the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee considers the bill. The bill aims to address the harms and social cost caused by drunk drivers in New Zealand. Each year drunk drivers are responsible for an average of 61 deaths and 244 serious injuries with a social cost amounting to almost $450 million. The bill will amend the Land Transport Act 1998. The Land Transport Act provides for a range of functions relating to land transport including specifying the adult drink-driving limits.The main purpose of the Land Transport Amendment Bill is to reduce the legal drink-driving limits. The adult breath-alcohol limit will be reduced from 400 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath to 250 micrograms per litre of breath. The blood-alcohol limit will reduce from 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood to 50 milligrams. The bill will also put in place infringement offences for They would be able to rebut that or challenge that presumption in court.In closing the changes proposed by this bill demonstrate the Government’s determination to improve road safety for all New Zealanders by reducing drink-driving. I acknowledge that there is great interest from all sides of the House in this bill. I commend it to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and I know that there are others who will have a great deal of interest in providing very significant input to what eventually will become a bill the House can pass. Thank you.
Vote: Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15134. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; United Future 1; ACT New Zealand 1.Noes56New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Bill read a first time.
English Bill: Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeEnglish Bill: Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15134. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): I moveThat the Appropriation (2012/13 Financial Review) Bill be now read a first time.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Health and Safety Workplace—Forestry IndustryText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Health and Safety Workplace—Forestry Industry[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon Shane Jones seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the response of the Minister of Labour to the nine forestry deaths so far this year. For there to be an urgent debate there must be a particular case of recent occurrence that involves the administrative or ministerial responsibility of the Government. With a death on 29 November although it is another tragic occurrence there is no ministerial responsibility for the actual ownership and running of most forestry operations. An urgent debate is a way of holding the Government to account. There must be distinct governmental responsibility for the particular case that is sought to be debated. Furthermore the Government is halfway through a proactive programme of assessing cable logging and contracting operations. On this basis I am not convinced that the Government’s response to the forestry deaths has reached the stage where an urgent debate is warranted. There will be other opportunities to debate this matter. The application is therefore declined.
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: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: The point raised by Grant Robertson is right. There is a very rigorous process by which questions are looked at carefully by the Office of the Clerk before they are finally accepted. Authentication is required. However Mr Brownlee raises a reasonable point in that sometimes some of the quotes probably need more looking at than perhaps occurs on all occasions. I will consider the matters raised by both Mr Robertson and the Hon Gerry Brownlee.
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: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): It is a fairly clear thing. When we provide questions to the Clerk we have to provide authentication for those questions. We provide that authentication and that ends up on the question paper. Where we are unable to do that there is occasionally dialogue with your office and we sometimes have to change the question when we have not been able to provide that authentication. So if it ends up on the question paper it has been authenticated.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have waited until the end of question time. Can you just have a look at question No. 12 where within the quotations marks it says: “We were never going to use legislation because we knew right from the get go that people wouldn’t vote for that”? There is no explanation in that question of the relationship to what it is. If this question time is going to be valuable for the public I think there should be some explanation of the context around that. The other point I would make is from further up in the afternoon. I think this is a worse offence. The Hon David Cunliffe asked question No. 4 and then put in quote marks the words “off the table”. They were comments not made by the Prime Minister yet they are conveyed on the question sheet as if they were. I think there is clearly something going wrong with the verification process and frankly it needs to be tidied 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: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15122. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will certainly consider both the points that have been raised but whether I get to the stage of turning my mind to the figures that are being advanced by effectively one side or the other is probably something that is unnecessary in my ruling. I will reflect on the point that the Prime Minister has made—[Interruption] Order! The information will now be available because it has been tabled.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15122. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Leader of the Opposition): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In reflecting upon that matter as requested by the Prime Minister and given the Prime Minister’s statement that in the 9 years of the Labour Government according to his information which may differ from ours there were seven more deaths than he has admitted occurred under his Government in 5 years would you turn your mind to the veracity of the point that the rate of deaths under the current Government is much higher than under the previous one.
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: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15122. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I get the point the Prime Minister is making. I will reflect on it. I think it is substantially the point I have been making throughout this question time. It is a political debating chamber and people are going to level figures that can at all times be disputed. But I will reflect on the matter for the Prime Minister.