"\u003C!DOCTYPE html\u003E\u003Chtml xmlns:xlink=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\u0022 xmlns:xsi=\u0022http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance\u0022 xmlns:mml=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0022\u003E\n  \u003Chead\u003E\n    \u003CMETA http-equiv=\u0022Content-Type\u0022 content=\u0022text/html; charset=utf-16\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cmeta name=\u0022viewport\u0022 content=\u0022width=device-width, initial-scale=1\u0022\u003E\n  \u003C/head\u003E\n  \u003Cbody style=\u0022font-family:sans-serif; font-size:100%;\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022716ef70104074af1a4d483f6999578f1\u0022\u003ETuesday, 23 February 2010\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002206cccfd898964048b40c5d06fa500c91\u0022\u003ETuesday, 23 February 2010\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000002\u0022\u003EMr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000004\u0022\u003EPrayers.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002246f6ecbadd234de8aae4f4f9df28ca95\u0022\u003EMinisterial Statements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e4192995a83e4c69a89ee53160a34d44\u0022\u003EFiji - New Zealand Relationship\u2014Recent Developments\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u00222084b9d9f3ee44b29c80e32ed755c809\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222084b9d9f3ee44b29c80e32ed755c809\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (Minister of Foreign Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E I wish to take a brief opportunity to update the House on recent developments in New Zealand\u2019s relationship with Fiji. As has been reported by some media, I took the opportunity of a transit through Fiji last Saturday to conduct further discussions with my Fijian counterpart, Ratu Inoke Kubuabola. My meeting with Minister Kubuabola last Saturday followed ongoing email contact over many months, a visit to Nadi by myself in early January, and a trilateral meeting involving Minister Kubuabola, Australian Minister Stephen Smith, and myself in Canberra earlier this month. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EWe have two objectives in carrying out this dialogue. Firstly, we wish to start to restore the diplomatic capacity in our Suva mission that has been depleted by progressive disputes with Fiji\u2019s administration. Since July 2007, we have lost three heads of mission and a trade commissioner who was the spouse of one of the heads of mission, as well as losing the capacity to replace both the police and defence attach\u00E9s as they departed. This has seriously threatened our capacity to deliver the range of services that we would expect to deliver from the mission, including our capacity to conduct meaningful dialogue with the Fiji administration. It is fair to record also that recent expulsions have affected Fiji\u2019s Wellington mission in a significant way, and it has been similarly motivated to improve this position. Secondly, it is our objective, having improved our capacity to conduct a relationship, to attempt to resolve some of the significant and strongly held differences that are held between us. That will not happen tomorrow, but I do hope that it will happen over time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EThe first phase of these discussions is essentially bilateral in character. That is understood and accepted by our Australian friends, who, although they have lost one head of mission late last year, have in every other respect a normal working mission in Suva, with a staff complement in the mid-20s. If and when the dialogue touches on the restoration of high commissioners, a three-way conversation will resume, involving Australia. I have kept closely in touch with my Australian counterpart, Stephen Smith, whom I briefed most recently last night. When there are wider issues touching sanctions in the discussions, there will naturally be a need for the Pacific Islands Forum, and potentially the Commonwealth, to engage. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EOn Saturday I was able to confirm the appointment of first secretaries in our respective missions. Fiji\u2019s first secretary has now taken up her appointment and our first secretary, Phillip Taula, will take up his position in Suva early in March. Fiji has sought to appoint an honorary consul in Auckland, to which favourable consideration is being given. New Zealand has today put forward the name of a senior Ministry of Foreign Affairs official for the position of New Zealand trade commissioner in Suva. I have been assured that this proposal, too, will receive favourable consideration. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EI am aware that there has been some media speculation in Fiji that I might meet with interim Prime Minister Bainimarama when he is in Hong Kong next month. It is correct that at this stage our respective diaries place both Mr Bainimarama and myself in Hong Kong for 2 days in March and that, in principle, we have agreed to take the opportunity to have an informal meeting, if this proves logistically possible. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EI reiterate today what I have stated on previous occasions: our engagement with the Fijian administration does not signal a change in policy, nor a change to the sanctions regime. Our commitment to democracy, the rule of law, and human rights is undiminished. I hope that we will, as a result of this dialogue, be able to consider changes to the sanctions regime at some point in the future. That will require that we make progress on some of the important and difficult matters over which we currently disagree. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EThere has been significant media interest in this matter here and in Fiji, and some colourful reporting of it, not all of it fully accurate. For that reason, I wanted to brief the House today on these developments. I trust that members will welcome the fact that we are making progress in small steps but also appreciate that there will be significant challenges and, no doubt, the odd setback as we move forward. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u0022a897f93cb0fe4715924983f74ad96886\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a897f93cb0fe4715924983f74ad96886\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Labour\u2014Te Atat\u016B):\u003C/span\u003E The New Zealand Labour Party supports the Government\u2019s efforts to strengthen the diplomatic capacity of our Suva mission and to use diplomatic channels to try to make progress on the outstanding political issues involving Fiji, New Zealand, the Pacific Islands Forum, and the Commonwealth. The links between the people of New Zealand and Fiji are strong. They are based on geographic proximity, a shared Commonwealth history, and strong people-to-people links, particularly of the large number of New Zealanders who were born in or who have family in Fiji. The Labour Party wants to resolve the problems that followed the overthrow of democracy and its replacement by a military regime. We support dialogue that seeks to achieve that objective. However, dialogue between New Zealand and Fiji must be a two-way process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EIssues of concern in relation to Fiji have become worse over the last 2 years. To summarise, there is no clear timetable or commitment to restore the right of Fiji\u2019s people to elect their own Government in place of the current military regime. There has been direct interference by the administration in the independence of Fiji\u2019s judiciary. There has been continuing censorship of the media. There are overt restrictions on people\u2019s freedom of speech. There have been arbitrary arrests, killings, and beatings of people in police cells, as reported recently by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and other respected non-governmental organisations. Labour believes that if sanctions are to be lifted, then these issues will need to be addressed and responded to positively by the current regime in Fiji. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EConcessions made by New Zealand and the Pacific Islands Forum cannot send the message to the wider Pacific region that the overthrow of a democratically elected Government by force does not have serious consequences. Should the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Murray McCully, meet Commodore Bainimarama in Hong Kong in March, we believe that he will need to give a strong message that a clear pathway towards the restoration of genuine democracy in Fiji is fundamental to improving relations between our two countries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003ELabour strongly desires the restoration of a positive relationship with Fiji, and engaging in dialogue is important in achieving that. Success in achieving it, however, requires a positive response from the interim Fiji administration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u0022f59bf19832cd431183c13d87e022fda2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f59bf19832cd431183c13d87e022fda2\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Green Party supports the statement of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. We support the reopening of the New Zealand High Commission in Fiji and we favour dialogue, but we say that this dialogue should be not just with the military regime but with all sections of the Fijian community. It should not be seen as a sign that somehow things are getting better in Fiji, because they are not. Unfortunately, the longer the military regime stays in power, the more it gets used to being in charge, to throwing its weight around, and to abusing the rights of its citizens, so I do not see that this re-establishment of relations is in any way an accommodation to the regime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIn fact, just recently, on 30 December, three magistrates in Fiji were sacked. This sacking follows on from the decision made in July last year to get rid of the Chief Magistrate, Ajmal Khan, and another magistrate. The judiciary is being seriously undermined. There have also been continuing attacks on the media, which have got worse recently, particularly with the changes to the sedition laws that enable people to be prosecuted and imprisoned for what they write, even on blog sites on the Internet. Even Fijian citizens living outside the country who return to Fiji can be subject to these new sedition laws. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe sedition laws also allow publications, websites, and all kinds of things to be closed down by the regime. Opposition voices are being suppressed. Just recently the Government said it had the right to effectively cancel the pensions of dissident voices in the community. I think even General Rabuka was affected by that action. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWe need dialogue not only from New Zealand but together with the Pacific Islands Forum, the European Union, the United Nations, etc. all combining to put pressure on the regime to return the country to democracy and to democratic elections. Sanctions are part of this dialogue\u2014although, of course, they have to be finely targeted in order to affect members of the regimes. It is good that over the last couple of years we have not had cases of Scouts who want to come here being affected, and things like that. The sanctions should be focused on the members of the regime, not necessarily on their families. If we combine with the international community, we can make some progress. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab48f8a4a35a406185ae625cab7bfe53\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab48f8a4a35a406185ae625cab7bfe53\u0022\u003EHon HEATHER ROY (Deputy Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The ACT Party is also supportive of the ministerial statement made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. ACT supports the recent developments and finds it very encouraging that talks have been re-established and that a head of mission is being re-established. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EThe return to democracy in Fiji is absolutely crucial, and the way in which we go about that as a country is very important. Not having a head of mission is certainly not productive; in fact, it is counter-productive. The proposal to have a trade commissioner in Fiji is also a step in the right direction and a productive move. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EIsolation is not the answer to Fiji\u2019s problems. It is certainly not a path that the ACT Party believes that New Zealand should go down. So the recent developments in re-establishing talks are certainly very encouraging. We should remember that Governments can do all sorts of things but that the people who suffer the most as a result of those decisions are the Fijian people themselves. We should be very mindful of the fact that the economy suffers and the people themselves suffer when dialogue ceases. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003ENew Zealand has a very long history with Fiji and that too should not be forgotten when we look at the Fijian situation at present. New Zealand, of course, at one stage had an air force base in Fiji. We have long served in UN missions with the Fijians, and, of course, we have a long history also of fighting side by side with Fijian troops, particularly in world wars. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003ERelationships are crucial. We must keep the dialogue open to negotiate the challenges that the Minister of Foreign Affairs spoke of, and we look forward to seeing further progress in this light. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022 data-id=\u00227b7c57faa68443308177e7c9279c7897\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227b7c57faa68443308177e7c9279c7897\u0022\u003EHon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader\u2014M\u0101ori Party): \u003C/span\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe kai te Rangatira, te Kaiwhakaw\u0101 o te Whare nei. T\u0113n\u0101 t\u0101tau e huihui mai nei i t\u0113nei r\u0101ngi. An\u0101, i tae t\u016Breiti mai au, k\u0101ore i rongo atu ki te kaupapa e haere nei engari i te whakarongo atu. Kai te m\u014Dhio kai hea te iwi M\u0101ori e t\u016B ana. N\u0101 reira, k\u0101re m\u0101tou e m\u014Dhio ana ka t\u016B t\u0113nei kaupapa hai pou herenga k\u014Drero m\u014D t\u0101tau i t\u0113nei rangi \u0113rangi, kei konei ng\u0101 whakaaro o t\u014D m\u0101tau p\u0101ti nei. Kei te tautoko m\u0101tou kia whakaarahia ake an\u014D te huarahi kia taea e t\u0101tau te k\u014Drero ki a r\u0101tau o H\u012Bt\u012B, kia k\u014Drero i ng\u0101 k\u014Drero, kia nohotahi, kia kimihia he huarahi, kia noho \u0101taahua, kia noho pai ai ng\u0101 iwi wh\u0101nui o H\u012Bt\u012B. N\u0101 reira t\u0113nei m\u0101tau o te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori nei e tautoko ana t\u0113n\u0101 kaupapa. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003E Kai a m\u0101tou hoki te tono o ng\u0101 iwi M\u0101ori kia haere r\u0101tau ki reira k\u014Drero ai. Kai reira e t\u0101rewa tonu t\u0113n\u0101 kaupapa i mua i te aroaro o te K\u0101wanatanga. Kai te reri ng\u0101 manakura o ng\u0101 iwi M\u0101ori ki te haere ki reira ki te k\u014Drero tahi ki a r\u0101tau hoki ng\u0101 tangata i reira. Engari, ka tika t\u0113n\u0101 k\u014Drero, kai te pai ki a m\u0101tau kia whakaarahia an\u014Dtia, kia whakat\u016Bria an\u014Dtia ng\u0101 k\u014Drero, kia kimihia te huarahi kia noho \u0101taahua, kia noho pai ai ng\u0101 tangata o H\u012Bt\u012B. Hoki au ki t\u0113n\u0101 whakatauk\u012B nui a te iwi M\u0101ori \u201CHe aha te mea nui o ng\u0101 mea katoa? M\u0101ku e k\u012B atu he tangata, he tangata, he tangata\u201D. Kia ora t\u0101tau.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003E[Greetings to you, Mr Speaker of this House, and to us all assembled here today. Now because of my late arrival, I did not hear the speeches as the matter before us progressed, but I was listening. I am aware of M\u0101oridom\u2019s position on this matter as well. Therefore, while we were unaware that this matter would be the subject of debate for us today, here are the views of our party. We support the move to set up a process again that will enable us to dialogue with those of Fiji, to talk the talk, to live as one, and to seek a way that will see the people at large of Fiji living harmoniously and well with each other. So we of the Maori Party support that strategy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EWe have the request from M\u0101ori tribes, as well, for them to go there and dialogue with them. That request is currently before the Government. M\u0101ori tribal leaders are ready to go there and dialogue with the people of Fiji. But we are comfortable with that statement about seeking a way to enable dialogue to resume so that the people of Fiji can live harmoniously and well with each other. I go back to that great aphorism of the M\u0101ori people \u201CWhat is the greatest thing of all things? I will say, it is mankind, mankind, mankind\u201D. Greetings to us all.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022 data-id=\u002236fd7d3a43e64fd98f1e3e261cc68442\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002236fd7d3a43e64fd98f1e3e261cc68442\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE (Leader\u2014United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I join with others who have expressed general support for the position that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has outlined in respect of New Zealand\u2019s developing relations with Fiji. Clearly, the position since 2006 has developed into a stalemate. We cannot go on with frequent mutual expulsion of high commissioners and diplomatic representatives and expect that that of itself will lead to progress, so I welcome the initiative that the Minister has indicated in the House today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EI also want to pick up what I thought was the thrust of comments made by the previous speaker, Dr Pita Sharples, in terms of the people-to-people relationship. One of the difficulties in this issue as it has unfolded over the last 3 years, particularly listening to some of the Fijian communities in New Zealand, is that there was not a great deal of love for the regime that preceded the current regime. The level of democracy apparent in Fiji was not, in fact, all that real, and there were significant issues relating to corruption and other activities that people felt that the new regime\u2014the interim regime\u2014was at least attempting to resolve. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EIt seems to me that in terms of the pathway forward the rather cautious approach that the Minister has outlined is correct. It will allow time for some of those matters to be discussed and debated, and for solutions to be arrived at that derive from the Fijian people but are not imposed on them from outside. So I acknowledge my support, certainly, for the steps that the Minister has taken; I think that they are prudent. I think that the discussions with his Australian colleague are also timely and prudent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EIt may well be that if there is a discussion with the commodore in Hong Kong in the next month or so, in the vein that the Minister has described, then that will also lead to more progress. I think this initiative is a good step forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f6990836ee9540b4a00dca8d14aedcc7\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002284d5534291084890ac1b641c566e327e\u0022\u003EQuestions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022071f609643f04d4da5e504e271d19465\u0022\u003EGST Increase\u2014Effect on New Zealanders\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2b8cbaccdbe4ede9500554b2200c418\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E1. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2b8cbaccdbe4ede9500554b2200c418\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Does he still expect that the vast bulk of New Zealanders will not be worse off under his proposed increase to GST; if so, which New Zealanders does he expect will be worse off?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u0022cc595c022dc74e9ea8c3fb4af3cbf8ea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cc595c022dc74e9ea8c3fb4af3cbf8ea\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E I expect that the vast bulk of New Zealanders will be better off under a tax switch that comprises an increase in the rate of GST to 15 percent, together with a reduction in personal income taxes across the board and upfront increases in benefits, New Zealand superannuation, and Working for Families payments. If the Government cannot achieve that, we would not increase GST. The member will have to wait until the Budget, however, for confirmation of any tax switch, let alone the details of its effects.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224808699cd417402b89f3d56b977a1628\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: Last night in a survey by Television One it was shown that over two-thirds of New Zealanders were opposed to raising GST, and the vast majority said they thought they would be worse off; how precisely will people be better off, and can he answer the question he did not answer last time about who will be worse off?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a549d6ae25744c1a9aee8d42247e28d\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I think what the poll last night actually showed was that if we ask people whether they want tax to rise, their answer will be no. In the same way, if we ask them in isolation whether they want income taxes to fall, their answer will be yes. When we ask them about the package, the message we are getting pretty clearly from New Zealanders is that they are looking forward to it, and that is why the party vote numbers were so strong in that poll for the National-led Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ffd978342654481a21d6a82e751701f\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: Does he accept the recent estimate by Westpac that, with his increase in GST, inflation will hit almost 5 percent next year, and does he also accept its view that that will damage growth, not assist it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1cab2d7a59a40a181b7651a629f27e0\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of the latter point, absolutely not, because the advice we have received about the overall economic benefits of the package strongly support a move away from taxing income at such a high rate, and taxing consumption at a higher rate. Secondly, there will be a one-off effect if prices rise by 2.2 percent. The estimate from Treasury that I last saw on a document was about a 2 percent increase. It is a one-off, just like it was in 1989 and 1985, when the then Labour Government increased GST.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022541e1020f07645c586008bd5749964a8\u0022\u003EChris Tremain\u003C/span\u003E: How many New Zealanders were made worse off, the last time GST was raised in 1989?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e01da9ce09684e96a3c7783e61d6af88\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It is a pretty simple question of responsibility. That was not dressed up as a report. It was a matter for which the Prime Minister had no responsibility\u2014I do not know whether he was even in the country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a77afd9e1e743e4b472a8afdcbca0da\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The interesting thing about the question that was asked is that it did not ask the Prime Minister to comment on the wisdom of the policy; it just asked for a reporting matter\u2014how many people were worse off. Ministers do have reporting responsibilities for matters that took place prior to their time. That is why I accepted the question. I believe that, so long as the Prime Minister does not launch too much into attacking the Government of the time, he may answer the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299e673689a4b403f8d3951d4e3a0cdc4\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Every New Zealander was worse off, actually, when the 1989 Government, of which Phil Goff was a member, raised GST without compensation. Hopefully, when Labour members are out there on their magical mystery bus tour, they can give out an apology for not compensating New Zealanders back then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c31b5676e89459da72ea2de01371cbf\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: Is it correct that, as a result of his increase in GST, superannuitants will face an immediate increase in their costs, but they will not be compensated for that for maybe 6 months or a year? That will leave them worse off. Does he intend, therefore, to amend the legislation to ensure that that does not happen?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022668e63b1433349ea8b130a1899fae70c\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: No, the member is completely jumping to conclusions. While the member is on his feet next time, maybe he could tell us whether he will be campaigning to drop GST and increase personal\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e2d8907fac2419cad35d435cdb7eace\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Prime Minister had answered the question perfectly well, but the last part of the answer was not in order. Mind you, in fairness, I have to confess that part of the question was not in order, either, but still.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252d611a132594eb3b486fd9abbd8b258\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: Is it true that no one at the last election voted for an increase in GST, because he explicitly promised that he would not increase it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e715c6920824bcea193026b283b9a22\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: No one at the last election voted for National to increase taxes to cover the deficit, and we are not doing that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277525eae98414bd783efb4a668369dc9\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: Nobody believes that. Is it true that, from what he is promising, GST will simply be a money-go-round\u2014taking with one hand and giving with the other\u2014that the real changes in tax policy will come from reducing the top tax rate from 38c to 33c, and that that will give him and his Ministers several hundred dollars a week, but that lowering of the tax rate will deliver nothing to people earning less than $70,000 a year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f65d138617a647e4b9de7d2e9d28f883\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: No, that is not true. It is interesting, though, seeing the Leader of the Opposition has raised the issue of the top personal tax rate, that when TV3 asked New Zealanders whether they wanted the top personal tax rate reduced, the number was something like 53 or 54 percent of New Zealanders who wanted that to happen, despite the fact that only 12 percent of New Zealanders pay the top personal tax rate. Why is that? It is because New Zealanders are aspirational for their country, ambitious for their earnings, and want a stronger New Zealand. I say to those New Zealanders \u201CGood on you! We\u2019re a hundred percent behind you.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be9f103191434c5daed618856bdaa065\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to the fact that a specific question was asked about whether anybody earning under $70,000 a year would get anything from lowering the tax rate. There is a yes or no answer to that; the Prime Minister simply did not address it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259e16825d3424a34ad8a691b48c9f410\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Had the honourable Leader of the Opposition asked exactly that question, I am sure a more precise answer would have been possible. But the honourable member may recollect that he had made some fairly lengthy statements around the question, as well, which the Prime Minister latched on to, in his answer. That is why I cannot assist the honourable member any further. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022506f512ee18848a5a9c5f6bf4aff3280\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: Will anyone earning under $70,000 a year get more money in his or her pocket simply by the lowering of the maximum tax rate from 38c in the dollar to 33c?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221820796ea3f64268af048785f71b049a\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I can now see why Labour\u2019s economic policies are going off the rails\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022230d36b4c6444a8d9a48fad785805265\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I have two points\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022851326a4d616424db2569306d0cc6537\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I hear the honourable member. I think\u2014well, I will let him make his points.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223c0c6332a26c438f8620461afea481b7\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: Not only did the Prime Minister not address the question but he deliberately turned his back on you, Mr Speaker, so that he could pretend not to see you standing in order to call him to order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022752e4e03cb8045308040d0a9bf547ceb\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Members must not comment like that on points of order. The point of order the Leader of the Opposition is raising is perfectly valid, and there should not be that comment. I think the Leader of the Opposition indeed had a fair point, on this occasion, because a fair question was asked about whether anyone earning below $70,000 a year would gain from a tax reduction in the top tax rate. Instead of answering that question, the Prime Minister launched straight into something to do with the Labour Party, which, I am quite sure, is not an appropriate way to answer that question. I think the House would appreciate an answer to the question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d92eb431f62435690d9172e42943987\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Let us assume that the Leader of the Opposition knows something about tax scales, so he will know that the top\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246cf072e6a2e4cd1b7d8192e2c3401eb\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You know what the point of order is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e19aa701b4848dfad5db61eb1a44a33\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I do, and again I say to the Prime Minister that I do not think that that is a very fair way to respond to a question\u2014and I mean it. The question that was asked was a fair question but the answer seeks to belittle the questioner, with the Prime Minister saying he is not sure what the Leader of the Opposition knows about tax scales. It is out of order to do that; it is absolutely out of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9056890e0634cc5a2ac95155035b084\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: People earning under $70,000 certainly will get a tax cut. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c06ea8af55224608a8a4778982ba617a\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Once again, as you pointed out, the question was very specific. The question was whether they would get any benefit from the top tax rate going from 38c in the dollar to 33c. I put it to you, Mr Speaker, that the Prime Minister is deliberately evading that question and not addressing it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3fea389a1b64befbcc681c5cdfb2e90\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: On this occasion I have to support the Prime Minister, because in response to the question, if I heard the Prime Minister correctly, he said that those earning below $70,000 would be getting a tax cut. I suspect he has answered in that way because maybe there is no logical answer to the question the member asked. So I think that it is a fair answer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267625e5c909c4aa4a169a97e8ff55804\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister believe that raising GST would create financial pressure, which, judging by McDonalds\u2019 record profits since the recession, would encourage people to eat unhealthy foods; and what progress has he achieved in examining the issues for low-income New Zealanders?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dffc28ac4511450386f79416b8887c14\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: There is no reason why people will be driven to unhealthy foods if their incomes are compensated for the increase in GST, and if the relative prices of foods stay the same. A rise in GST, for example, will not affect the relative price of an apple compared with a packet of chips. I also say to the member that different rates of GST on different foods would create huge complexities, and hundreds of pages of tax rules on things like a chocolate biscuit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022532dfcfcc1054af58458822afefa4487\u0022\u003ETe Ururoa Flavell\u003C/span\u003E: He take whakatua, e te Mana Whakaw\u0101. Aroha mai, engari, n\u0101 runga i te \u0101huatanga o ng\u0101 k\u014Drero o t\u0113r\u0101 taha, k\u0101ore au i tino rongo Ki te whakam\u0101rama a te Pirimia ki te p\u0101tai a te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori i rere atu ki a ia. Te tikanga me rongo m\u0101tou i ng\u0101 whakautu. Koi r\u0101, kei te \u012Bnoi atu kia tukuna a ia kia whakautu i te k\u014Drero, kia taea ai e m\u0101tau te rongo i te whakautu.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E[I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Apologies, but because of the way that the members on the other side conducted themselves, I really did not hear the Prime Minister\u2019s explanation to the question put to him by the M\u0101ori Party. Surely we have the right to hear the responses. So my plea is that you allow him to respond again so that we can hear it.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf38f2923f924d22a6dd8c21b7445519\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I make it clear that the Opposition will have no objection to that answer being tabled. It is written.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273f544c2952e49d894772bf2254b4cb0\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The House is in fairly high spirits today and I absolutely accept that, but the point of order made by Te Ururoa Flavell is a perfectly fair point of order in that a M\u0101ori Party member Rahui Katene asked a question and could not hear the answer. I invite the Prime Minister to repeat his answer, and I want to hear less interjection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f31a482963ef47278aa4e3bfde3835d7\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: It is true; it is written, and that is because they are harder questions to answer. The ones from the Leader of the Opposition are pretty easy so I just wing them. The answer is there is no reason why people will be driven to unhealthy foods if their incomes are compensated for the increase in GST and the relative price of food stays the same. A rise in GST will not, for example, affect the relative price of an apple and a packet of chips. I also say to members that different rates of GST on different foods would create huge complexities and hundreds of pages of tax rulings on things like chocolate, whether it is inside or outside the biscuit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b0a5b8e33db4d43a4c83370b8825e93\u0022\u003EHon Peter Dunne\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I ask that the Prime Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022079c5e71cb8c47f6a7f355708ba13449\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order is being heard and this one will be heard in silence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226dd383ddbdca4024846255d22cfe4828\u0022\u003EHon Peter Dunne\u003C/span\u003E: I ask that you ask the Prime Minister to repeat that last answer in silence, because after about the first two sentences it was simply impossible to hear it in this part of the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022087d87eea6e6442f89ac5e56ac6a5d8a\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It was the Prime Minister\u2019s fault that that happened. The Prime Minister made a gratuitous comment before commencing his answer, and as Speaker I cannot expect the other side of the House to sit there in silence in such a circumstance. The Prime Minister knows that he has actually been a naughty boy and there is not much I can do about it. But if members\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264bdf0b44d3746bd9f623909ecbbcebb\u0022\u003EHon Peter Dunne\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That may well be so, but there is a further aspect to this, which I would ask you to reflect upon and that is that since we moved away from having the headset amplification at our chairs it has become much more difficult, with the overhead amplification, to hear in these rather rowdy situations. I think that is something that obviously you cannot resolve today but to which some consideration does need to be given, because although this will be a robust place it is becoming increasingly difficult to hear people from all sides of the House if there is a lot of noise around.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221bac5d3035bc42b5966402483a4af074\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member makes a fair point and I am interested in the medium term in making it possible for members to hear through their earpieces when there is noise like that. The point I made still stands\u2014that discipline is required if members are asking questions of a party, or if a member who is part of the Government, if you like, is asking a question of a Minister, and Ministers make that kind of remark, there will be noise, and I cannot stop that. It is unfair for me to treat the Opposition differently, but I would ask members to be mindful and try to not let the House get too noisy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223cf628bc3ccf4441820e2f7e8867674d\u0022\u003EEconomy\u2014Savings and Exports\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022 data-id=\u0022654f45cea84a4c068fc830c60044ff1d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E2. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022654f45cea84a4c068fc830c60044ff1d\u0022\u003ECRAIG FOSS (National\u2014Tukituki)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: Why is it so important that the Government rebalance the economy towards savings and exports?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u00228ea77cc654b04bcfaf65e63efb386753\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ea77cc654b04bcfaf65e63efb386753\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E New Zealand families and households expect an economy that generates new jobs, secure jobs, and higher incomes. We must rebalance the economy because we will not be able to provide new jobs and higher incomes if we continue with economic growth based on too much consumption, too much Government spending, and too much borrowing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a327d8be810242cbbc0d774fb56d90c6\u0022\u003ECraig Foss\u003C/span\u003E: What benefits would a properly growing economy bring for the Government\u2019s finances?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2c886631b4f44b1977d2d4e01fec842\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Stronger economic growth makes an enormous difference over medium periods of time. Had the economy grown at, say, 3 percent since 2005\u2014just above the OECD average over the last 5 years\u2014GDP would now be around 10 percent or $20 billion higher than it is, and Government finances would be around $6 billion per year better off. A few extra percentage points of growth are well worth it for everybody. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ba783accf144603bb2341befb056ffb\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: If the Minister is so keen on rebalancing the economy in favour of savings and investment, why did his Government cut in half the KiwiSaver incentives and completely remove the research and development investment incentives?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dee11b1f940b4026be031257f30e635b\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I am pleased that the member now understands that the economy needs significant rebalancing. To respond to the particular questions, I say that the Government replaced the previous Government\u2019s Fast Forward Fund, I think it was\u2014which did not actually exist or pay for anything\u2014with real money, which is financing real innovation and science.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022190a758383554fb8863588234c4de6ed\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was a very simple one to try to draw from the Minister the link between rebalancing in favour of savings and investment and the removal of two policies that did exactly that. The Minister did not address that question. He talked about a third policy, the Fast Forward Fund, which was not raised in the supplementary question, at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fde56eabdac74a5d8c68481fc733d55c\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I will allow the member to repeat his question, because of uncertainty about it, and I will listen very carefully to it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca6f24cc08c948879ff112f2db711677\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: If he is so keen on rebalancing the economy in favour of savings and investment, why did his Government cut in half the KiwiSaver incentives and completely remove the research and development incentive policy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0b90fa05af241feb7b3bea93e963ac0\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Because we did not think either policy was appropriate in the circumstances of what, under his party\u2019s management, was a very poorly performing New Zealand economy, which was then hit by the global financial crisis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022daa36daefcdd4179ab739e1b74e5951d\u0022\u003ECraig Foss\u003C/span\u003E: What benefits would a properly growing economy bring for New Zealand families?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248d64ff5eca544f29df9095dc096ffcb\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Most of the benefits of a growing economy that flow through to the Government accounts also apply to families and households. Average household income today in New Zealand is $75,000 before tax. Had the economy grown at 3 percent since 2005, rather than the half percent that it actually grew, the average household would be about $5,000 a year better off. But instead of 3 percent growth\u2014a bit above the average for the OECD\u2014under Labour we had half a percent growth, so we missed out on that benefit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b57fba4c0ba44186a84faeabe94d2ac8\u0022\u003ECraig Foss\u003C/span\u003E: What steps is the Government taking to rebalance the economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d381963f6cf41d89ea5b137d99df08a\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The Prime Minister outlined a comprehensive suite of policy in this House several weeks ago. In particular, he outlined plans for changing the balance of taxation. We would be interested to know whether on the Opposition\u2019s bus tour it will campaign on reducing GST and increasing income tax.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e45ed826d722490292ff5cab7ff9cd89\u0022\u003EHon Sir Roger Douglas\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister agree that the Government needs to help rebalance the economy through private sector job creation; if so, is he concerned at the high rate of youth unemployment, at 26.5 percent, and especially M\u0101ori youth unemployment, at 39 percent; if so, what does he intend to do about it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ceaf565db43a4495ba18b4fb2333004e\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I agree with the member that private sector job creation is the key to a sustainable recovery. The Government is overstretched. It is already borrowing too much money and cannot afford to employ more people, even if it wants to improve its services. I share the member\u2019s concern about youth unemployment. The Government has invested in a number of schemes to provide youth with the opportunity to stay connected to the workplace, but we will need private businesses to have the confidence to invest and employ 18 and 19-year-olds, who may not have a strong track record in the job market.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002217244734c3004020867f035ba63f75ef\u0022\u003ETax System Changes\u2014Alignment of Top Personal Tax and Trustee Tax Rates\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022 data-id=\u0022661d8f4a9b0246b087477d8bb6c1f8ff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E3. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022661d8f4a9b0246b087477d8bb6c1f8ff\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour\u2014New Lynn)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement: \u201Csubstantial gains could be made by aligning the top personal tax rate and the trustee tax rate\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u0022c42fc32de9ee4ed5aa9aaeeec682b91d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c42fc32de9ee4ed5aa9aaeeec682b91d\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, we could make substantial gains in the integrity of the tax system. Under the previous Government the number of people paying tax on $1 million did not change in 10 years even though the economy grew significantly. An Inland Revenue Department survey of the 100 wealthiest taxpayers showed that under the previous Government half of them did not pay the top tax rate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc732615ca3d4cc0a89888645630d968\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the next member, I think the level of noise is simply unacceptable. I would ask members to be mindful of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1a9c720f531474fb12306685784cebd\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Will he concede that only those on the highest incomes would make \u201Csubstantial gains\u201D as a result of a reduction in the top tax rate to the trustee tax rate, and when will his Government show some decisive plans to close down the loopholes he has mentioned around loss-attributing qualifying companies and portfolio investment entities, as well as the trust rate?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022312af894dafa47f38d217e70928b5e9a\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The Government is working on exactly those issues. It is a bit ironic to be questioned by a Minister in the previous Government, which put all of those inconsistencies in place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289e61f8f0cb548a790af94b82f76c8ca\u0022\u003EAmy Adams\u003C/span\u003E: What considerations will the Government make in deciding the final mix of any tax system changes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022919f82a3421a4e17a188b61cc47abde2\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Our most important consideration is the impact of a change in the tax mix on prospects for economic growth. As I pointed out earlier today, a stronger-growing economy delivers more new jobs and higher incomes for everybody. We will be looking to tilt the playing field so that people have stronger incentives to get ahead, to work, to save, and to invest, and less incentive to consume too much and borrow too much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fdac3d22cfbc4f138c99b6a442db486e\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister received any advice that, under this trickle-down theory, the highest-income earners will receive substantial gains while low and middle income hard-working New Zealanders will be left, at very best, no worse off?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286bca1a2294b411ab30b1d430d93d03e\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The Government is putting together a package, and the key to that package is likely to be a tax switch, as we have explained, between GST and income tax, and additional taxation of property. As I pointed out to the member, investment housing and commercial property in New Zealand are largely in the ownership of higher-income people. Whether any individual is better off or worse off will depend to some extent on his or her personal circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022502cf92e36bc444692499a1b0d13c2e8\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree that this \u201Ctax switch\u201D would instead be better done as a change in tax thresholds, which would deliver more equal distribution of tax cuts, and can he assure the public that this will be a part of his \u201Ctax switch\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223297ce52a8364c56a6942acd94fa838d\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: If the member is talking about equity, he can go to the website\u2014it has been open for 6 months but he discovered it only after Christmas\u2014that shows how the Tax Working Group calculated the impacts of various scenarios on equity. He can look at the Gini coefficients and the ratios between median and lower quartile incomes, and decide for himself. He can then go out on his bus trip and put his proposition forward, and I would like to hear what it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bffb0e12d03141319664c600258b6eb7\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a pretty simple question about whether the changes to tax thresholds would be part of the so-called \u201Ctax switch\u201D. Instead of addressing that question, we heard a lot of invective about\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229bda9b3e796e44d7955b8475d80dcdc0\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I listened very carefully to the member\u2019s question. If he had asked just that, it might have been possible to get an answer on whether changes to the threshold will be part of the tax package. But the member made a whole lot of further statements about equity, and the Minister of Finance picked up on those statements and responded to them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d255353e1bb54c7c930599486ddce968\u0022\u003ECanterbury\u2014Irrigation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022 data-id=\u002211f5264518db4fad82c071735fd5e503\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E4. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211f5264518db4fad82c071735fd5e503\u0022\u003EDr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader\u2014Green)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: What was he referring to when he said his Government would \u201Ctake action this year to remove particular regulatory roadblocks to \u2026 irrigation in Canterbury\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u0022a0ca9675384c4063a740295574f3c8ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a0ca9675384c4063a740295574f3c8ba\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E I was referring to a range of options currently being developed and considered by the Government to deal with some of the issues around irrigation, such as those identified in the Canterbury Water Management Strategy. However, no final decisions have yet been made. It is also important to note that the Land and Water Forum will be reporting to the Government this year on wider issues of water management.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d19d34a3b03439f96a7a2ee53caeabc\u0022\u003EDr Russel Norman\u003C/span\u003E: Does he consider the elected councillors of Environment Canterbury to be one of the roadblocks to more irrigation in Canterbury?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ada5daaef204f1d84c2632db197aab1\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure it is possible to answer that question. What I can say is that having read the report about Environment Canterbury, the level of dysfunctionality currently operating in that organisation was very alarming to me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6ba5ffee1294a0fb959d3a09ca8fb0a\u0022\u003EDr Russel Norman\u003C/span\u003E: With reference to the review he referred to in his answer, does he have confidence in the review of Environment Canterbury\u2019s administration of the Resource Management Act given that it was headed by Wyatt Creech, who is the director of Open Country Cheese, a dairy company with 12 convictions for breaching the Resource Management Act in the last 3 years? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ccb3d1f3374443fac8f6d7d82b6b815\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I have enormous confidence in Wyatt Creech as someone who is well equipped to handle these issues. As a former Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand he served New Zealand very, very well and put aside his private and personal interests. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202159cd40b724a86841858f4534c1a0d\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: What is the Government\u2019s view on the recommendation from the review group that iwi liaison be elevated in importance with Environment Canterbury, based on the finding that iwi are typically recognised only as a special interest group rather than being recognised as the Treaty partner? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022babeded1f50744d6ac7a3dae44e63c12\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: The Government is still considering the report and no decisions have been made yet. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c68038d68b8e4699ada7b65325566ef8\u0022\u003EDr Russel Norman\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree that the dairy industry has a vested interest in seeing more irrigation in Canterbury? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022960dcb45dac54b1a8d0c43b046f1dc1a\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022948f2997e2b047dfba065d787a1eaf98\u0022\u003EDr Russel Norman\u003C/span\u003E: In that case, how can it possibly be appropriate for a senior member of the dairy industry to be conducting the review of Environment Canterbury when Environment Canterbury is the regulator of the dairy industry in that region? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebdb9daa06f94ac0ac1322e54436ffe8\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Because I think Wyatt Creech is a person who understands the industry well. He is able to analyse problems in organisations, having been around them for a long time. When I say yes to the dairy industry it is a statement of fact\u2014that is, if Canterbury and the areas around Canterbury and Otago were to have greater irrigation, it would lend itself to greater economic output and therefore it will of course be in their interest. But any increase in production in dairying would have to be matched by care and concern for the environment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1d60153442c4c499c7286e2367454e6\u0022\u003EDr Russel Norman\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree that Canterbury\u2019s water resources are already under enormous pressure, that there is already over-extraction of water from aquifers and rivers, and that there is already enormous pollution as a result of dairy intensification; if so, how will more irrigation result in anything other than more environmental decline?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e73af78ecf444944a9cb3a9654db7e3c\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I do agree that there is pressure on the aquifers in the Canterbury region. The way to resolve that is potentially to build greater water storage, so that less pressure is on those aquifers, and less of the water that currently pours out to sea continues to do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e7f498ca459445b9a33ba0bd4848c8c\u0022\u003EDr Russel Norman\u003C/span\u003E: Can we take from the Prime Minister\u2019s answers that this Government will always put short-term private interests ahead of long-term public good when those two things come into conflict, as they are in the case of\u2014[Interruption] I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The noise in the House means I can barely hear myself. I would ask\u2014[Interruption] This is a point of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221632aec0062b46fc85095b9537d7a882\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order is being heard, and there is a lot of noise around the House. The House is very noisy today. I sympathise with the honourable member. I did not interrupt because I did not want to interrupt his question. I could hear him, which was a little unusual. Sometimes I cannot, because the noise is so loud, but I could hear the honourable member quite clearly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022193855196b9349e4a5889e1f3bb72540\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My point of order is very simple. The Standing Orders are clear that questions are not to include reputational attacks on members or a Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e097129eb564837b481fe24db9915b1\u0022\u003EDr Russel Norman\u003C/span\u003E: It wasn\u2019t a reputational attack. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9ddc6e13ef44719a5a7d7537fe7c662\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it was. It said that the only interest we have is short term and that we are not interested in long-term interests or environmental concerns. It is very plain from the report that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e22bcc97306444b9af8c9f8fa10dad5\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member must not get into a debate when raising a point of order. I accept the point of order raised by the member. It does get difficult to maintain order in the House when members feel that questions are breaching the Standing Orders. I must say that the honourable member\u2019s question did contain an assertion about how he saw the Government\u2019s reaction to a certain situation. Members should remember that they should ask questions rather than make that kind of assertion, which tends to lead to disorder. I invite the honourable member to ask his question again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd324122b6e54bdfa4f60c4cb29b2269\u0022\u003EDr Russel Norman\u003C/span\u003E: In the case of the limited water resources in the Canterbury region, how can we be certain that the Government is not putting short-term private interests ahead of the long-term public good? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ad80ef6fa714bdca6aee973db4529fb\u0022\u003EHon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Firstly, it is because the Government takes a balanced view to economic growth and environmental issues. Secondly, putting it bluntly, if we build water storage capability, one would assume that it will be there for the long term and will take pressure off the aquifers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dcb8a4a74aa748128b6e682938593a0f\u0022\u003EHealth Services\u2014Cuts to Front-line Services\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u0022236a0e7879e5497bbebff024c0cce8a0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E5. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022236a0e7879e5497bbebff024c0cce8a0\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Health: What front-line health services are being cut?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u00222bfbb44b8e914cd6a63cc5ee01b31186\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222bfbb44b8e914cd6a63cc5ee01b31186\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E Front-line services overall are being increased, despite the significant financial challenges that face the country. As we move to fix our hospitals and take the public health service off the track to financial crisis, the Government has always said some programmes will be changed. Given that thousands of health services are delivered to over a million New Zealanders every year, it is not possible to determine all services that may have changed for these individuals. There is more money, and more front-line services are being delivered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201772d2dec4e4653ad027006fc243d49\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That was a question on notice to the Minister of Health about front-line health services. Although we accept that he said there are thousands of cases that could not go through in terms of cuts to those front-line services, he must surely be able to offer something to the House for a question that was on notice, if there has been a reduction in front-line services.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aaf5f1e9587b48588d7e06c15c7257a4\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I believe the Minister\u2019s answer was perfectly in order. He argued that from his perspective, there was increased funding for more front-line services. It is a perfectly fair answer to dispute the question that was asked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220341001bbfd247cbbd185638cdd04643\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: When he labelled cuts to home help for the elderly as a change, does he think that older New Zealanders who, 6 months ago, had their home help reduced will now congratulate him on the change announced by the Otago and Southland district health boards that will see 3,000 older people across that region have their home support completely cut?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022218c09c10be24153a978d0609c450bac\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I have rung the chief executive of the Otago and Southland boards, and he advises me that everyone will be offered an assessment. While people await their assessment, their home cleaning hours will be maintained. We are dealing with a legacy of neglect at the Otago and Southland district health boards. The previous Government left those district health boards with over $20 million of unfunded services, which we have to fill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e405a0ec74e4b64a38a7cce442edfec\u0022\u003EHon Jim Anderton\u003C/span\u003E: After explaining to the House on 13 October last year that cuts by the Canterbury District Health Board to home services for the elderly would not result in any less money being spent on home help by that board, what does he say now that the Otago and Southland boards are going through exactly the same cuts in order to save about $4 million a year, with further cuts to personal care and home assistance in the pipeline?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c46a5c23dc8f4adfac2e1b2fc2297049\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: In respect of the Canterbury situation, I think the member will be aware that although a number of people have been reassessed and have lost their home cleaning support, a significant number have actually had increases as a result of that process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299022116416e48c79f32f30a3cd30691\u0022\u003EHon Jim Anderton\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister aware that many of the elderly people affected by these cuts, many of them aged between 85 and 90, now have to pay between $25 and $35 per week for the same service that had previously been provided by the district health board, and that these extra costs impose a very heavy burden on our most vulnerable citizens?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a15035d8b8a04d1bb5833119266abaef\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: If the member has a specific instance of a case that he would like me to look into, I would be more than happy to do that. But if the member looks at Otago and Southland, he will see that the Government has increased the funding for those two district health boards by $28 million this year. That is a 4.4 percent increase. It compares with the $21 million increase they got under the last year of the previous Labour Government. We have inherited a very difficult situation in Otago and Southland, and we are endeavouring to fill the gap in unfunded services. That, frankly, is essential to securing services for people in those district health boards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c28b57dfe224c6fa05f03a80bd049fc\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister understand that for some older New Zealanders, having 1 or 2 hours\u2019 home support a week is all that stands between them staying safely in their own home or having to move into a rest home; if so, how will he explain to those who are being forced out of their own home that this cut is just a change for them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220223ba55254a4d66ae9a8c898b2c7fa5\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: If the member sincerely wants me to investigate a case of someone being forced out of his or her home as a result of this change, then I would be happy to look into it, as I do for other colleagues in her party. But I need to tell the member that I have been assured by all the district health boards involved that no one will be unsafe or unable to stay in his or her home as a result of these changes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273c98347270f405b831c09dbefda0007\u0022\u003EDr Paul Hutchison\u003C/span\u003E: Could the Minister tell us again how much more in resources this Government has provided to Otago District Health Board and Southland District Health Board; and why, with this increase, are some services being re-examined?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022578453054cae41ada0059f6708f5b984\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: This financial year the National-led Government increased the funding for the Otago and Southland district health boards by $28 million, or 4.4 percent\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bbffc9a530cd440b83bb6b1783f4189d\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Then why are there cuts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235fb38a17d2b4305b2dd1cda81040705\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: The member opposite asks why the changes are occurring. Well, although the previous Government increased the budgets of those boards by $21 million a year earlier, we have inherited from that Government a rapidly worsening financial position at those district health boards, with unfunded services of over $20 million. We are endeavouring to fill this gap steadily over the years with increased funding, because that is essential in order to secure the future of health services in Otago and Southland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224508254b99bd43e3bbcafb22251341cd\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister satisfied that the decision to cut domestic assistance to 3,000 residents in Otago and Southland\u2014that is, doing laundry, house cleaning, shopping, and meal preparation\u2014without any assessment of those people\u2019s needs is fair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6c232ff681e45f296279e4eac0f5938\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: First of all, I am advised that meal preparation is unaffected by these changes. I can also tell the member, as I said earlier, that the chief executive has assured me that everyone who would like to have an assessment will be offered one, and that while people are waiting for it, their home cleaning will be maintained.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022596e1eb612de4ea4bf91a14a25ffe1b8\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister reassured by the letter from the district health boards that is being sent to Otago and Southland senior citizens, telling them that their home support has now been completely cut, but advising them on how to pay for that service if they are able to pay for it; if so, why does that reassure him?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247fe8bb91db24fc7be52d6fc8b6d1f35\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I am unable to comment on what the member has said, other than to say that the changes being made at Otago District Health Board and Southland District Health Board are not new. The Whanganui District Health Board, when facing considerable budget pressures, also looked at its home-based support services in 2006. As a result, the Whanganui District Health Board, under the previous Government, reassessed people with low levels of need and swiftly removed their services and tightened the access criteria. I think that this is a case of one thing that those members did while in Government but that they do not now want to do in Opposition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e7971dbbeda4c438cfa561402215f1f\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: How will the elderly resident who lives in an isolated area in Southland where no Meals on Wheels service exists, and who has been relying on 1\u00BD hours of support per week, but who has now been told that that preparation for his meals has been cut, get along now that the help has been cut totally?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222077fdf2bc3e4fbf8198a55ae59dc5c8\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: If the member sincerely wants me to answer that question in respect of a personal case, then she needs to give me advance notice. If those facts are accurate, then I would be happy to take up the matter directly with the district health board, as I do for her colleagues opposite.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ed2502d4bb94384854ac7301284dd05\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table four documents. The first is the case summary of an elderly resident from Southland who has cancer, angina, and osteoarthritis in both knees. He has just lost his 1 hour a week of home support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221dbb9e86d7de4bd2bdc50f9ed2866ea1\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member has sought leave to table a document. Could she identify for the House who has prepared the document.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220daea3f00f7c4eafadcc187c9e9b7eb9\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: It is a case summary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274650467fe7848ccbaaf3014cf797be7\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: But I asked who had prepared the document.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7435b17d10a429e96c74e35b84e26e6\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: I have, on the basis of information given to me\u2014[Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d073e0290c52452f94881018af1538c5\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order is being heard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6b741e8d1f24f13b1691e5de1e672a7\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014for advocacy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241774e2ec5d649a1a42fc7c0463eaeb9\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e32b751fa58473d9b6155cea981d2d1\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: The second is the case summary of an elderly resident from Southland who has congestive heart failure and is both hearing and sight impaired, and who has just lost 1 hour a week of home support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d50646c62c1448f8120cfc884c4b671\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f2783192c3d94a4ebd760adfa3bb5c3d\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: The third is the case summary of an elderly resident from Southland who has Parkinson\u2019s disease and osteoarthritis, who uses walking sticks to get around the home, and who had just lost 1 hour a week of home support. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1e7af09d3444633b8c8e6e8deec750e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There appears to be no objection. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204f46fac21014832a95926c7591c505f\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219d941a5c7b545ca89d181407f141576\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the member I want to make a point. What is troubling me about the process we are going through at the moment is that it seems to set a precedent for any member in the House to prepare a document containing a summary of anything the member likes, and seeking leave to table it in the House. I do not believe that is in the spirit of the Standing Order that enables members to seek leave to table documents. I will allow the member to seek leave to table her final document, but I warn members that if this practice continues I may well take action to deal with it, because I do not see it as being consistent with the intention of the Standing Order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227728ebd529d44fb2aa0e325e9e354370\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table the case summary of a 79-year-old Dunedin resident who has renal failure and a pacemaker, and who has just lost 1 hour a week of home support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215437122a0394ed1949f6d851ebf8f9e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a99a3f36826e4cda9bb80c0c556c5829\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think Nick Smith has just indicated the proper course of action. I want to speak to the ruling you made before that application. I think that if all members of the House are unanimous that a document can be tabled, then it would be a very serious matter if you said it could not be. The matter is in the hands of the House. This is something that has been done on many occasions over the years, and it is seen as a legitimate way of getting particular cases on to the Table of the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296ac0a1cbbf748fcb1bdc07e0b6988c1\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I hear the honourable member. I must say I have been in this House longer than the honourable member has been himself, and I have not seen this practice be pursued in the way that it is being pursued at the moment. My concern is this: with regard to certain case summaries that have been described today, members would be very cautious about refusing leave to table them in case members were seen as being hard-hearted, uncaring, or that kind of thing. But this is not the intention of the process of tabling documents. Members\u2019 own notes are not documents in the nature of the Standing Order. I just ask members to reflect on that. I have not ruled anything yet, but I warn members that if this practice is pursued too far my concern might grow in the matter, because I do not see it as being consistent with the intention of the Standing Order. But I have not ruled on anything as yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022758486365a374503994df5e29c71502a\u0022\u003EPolice\u2014Attacks on Officers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022 data-id=\u002281da16dc01074af6a2de4adf8742f0e7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E6. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002281da16dc01074af6a2de4adf8742f0e7\u0022\u003ESANDRA GOUDIE (National\u2014Coromandel)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Police: What reports has she received about serious attacks on New Zealand Police officers over the last few days?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u00225aefca05973f4b6387fef4d2174bfa75\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225aefca05973f4b6387fef4d2174bfa75\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police):\u003C/span\u003E It is very distressing that three of our police officers have been subjected to serious attacks while doing their job to protect the public. I have personally visited two of the officers to offer my support, and shortly will be visiting the third officer. Two of the officers are now recovering from their injuries at home, while Constable John Connelly of Tuakau has been undergoing surgery to insert a metal plate in his head and to wire up his jaw. These officers have shown extraordinary bravery in the face of brutal attacks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022772ae8f42ce642d3ba079fdf38e9628d\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: What information does she have on the number of assaults on police officers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d54787ae68f462ea33f6842b22612a0\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: Sadly, over the past decade there has been a growing culture of disrespect towards the police, which is shown by the rise in serious assaults on them from 216 in the year 1999, to 412 last year. Last year there also was a total of 2,481 assaults generally on police. It is appalling that officers are being viciously attacked while they are protecting the public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd8b1f7ca2a44e3cba93634f4367e6b6\u0022\u003EJonathan Young\u003C/span\u003E: What action is being considered by the Government in response to these attacks?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a93868e83b404e9886cbc8f8ad98ea51\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: Back at Christmas I asked the police to provide their advice on any action that can be taken to reduce serious assaults on our officers. One option may be to increase the deterrent effect and demonstrate society\u2019s disgust at these crimes by putting serious assaults on police on the list of \u201Cthree strike\u201D offences. However, it is important to point out that offending against law enforcement officers has long been taken into account as an aggravating factor in sentencing under the law. This Government would prefer that our officers do not face any sort of attack. They have our full support to rebuild respect for the law. We will also consider any other suggestions they may have to improve their safety on the front line. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022142d48bfc8fe434380e95b4ecae1535b\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Will any legislative or policy changes in relation to attacks on police officers also be extended to other front-line service workers, such as prison guards, ambulance officers, Fire Service staff, doctors, nurses, and teachers, who also face violence in the course of their duties?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1227a451f034929aece24678a8b9988\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: That would certainly be something we could consider, but I think it is important to note that the police and corrections officers already have a special situation in relation to the law and assaults on them, and that is because they are our front-line law enforcement officers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002244d418ff94bf44e2af69d355966fddd3\u0022\u003EEducation, National Standards\u2014Minister\u2019s Statements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00222c67405032d342d9ae8420d3269b3b78\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E7. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222c67405032d342d9ae8420d3269b3b78\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Education: Does she understand and stand by all statements she has made on national standards?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022 data-id=\u002249993a74437d4b80bc4ea80b4eab12d9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002249993a74437d4b80bc4ea80b4eab12d9\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education):\u003C/span\u003E Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224bb34a217d5e472da5ae939e85c6750f\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Does she stand by her statement that all that teachers who are using asTTle or progressive achievement tests need to do is \u201CKeep doing what you\u2019re doing, we don\u2019t want to change, we\u2019re happy for you to continue using those current assessment techniques.\u201D; if so, can she explain exactly how those teachers will report against the new standards if they just keep doing what they are doing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c222ea6865154bbbb945586be39ec240\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am unaware of where the member has got that quote from, but certainly the intent of the national standards policy is that teachers are able to continue using the assessment tools\u2014such as progressive achievement tests, asTTle, and the Supplementary Test of Achievement in Reading\u2014that they are currently using in schools. They will be required to report in plain English against the national standards to parents from this year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022caa3247c3fc34320a4593e372a34d96d\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I know this is unusual and you are not very happy when people do this, Mr Speaker, but I seek leave to table a Media Monitors transcript of Radio New Zealand from 24 January this year, to indicate to the Minister where she made that statement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fc02eb70b6342d79d180470dbe62694\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have made a ruling that I will not put leave for recent media transcripts to be tabled in the House; I must stick with that ruling. The member has made his point: he has established where the statement was made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfc4000add9240ac9186c8f8b21f3783\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: How will teachers who keep on doing what they are doing, as the Minister indicated in a radio report in January that they could, translate that reporting to national standards without doing anything else?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022163b6c07239e4d5bbed5c713670fe8ff\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I say to the member that throughout this country teachers are continuing to do what they are doing. They are telling me that when they unpack the national standards it is, in fact, business as usual. They will keep doing the assessment in their schools that they are currently doing. But a large number of schools are not using assessment techniques effectively, and teachers in those schools will have to make some changes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca3bc89bdc494dd6aa6b78e4d723957e\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: If teachers just keep doing what they are doing, as the Minister says that they can, what additional information will be available to parents?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254d04d5ad559487dbbac9bf28eb5e638\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think you know what my point of order is about: the interjection from the Minister of Finance asking why you are not on the bus.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd741020f5374c8fb5847489d2826580\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order has been raised. It is fair that members should not be interjecting: \u201CWhy aren\u2019t you on the bus?\u201D, which refers to the Speaker. Members may wish that I was on the bus but, in fact, they must not do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226fb0bdbc0154a61a35c2397624f0279\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: The national standards are a tool to identify children who are not progressing as they should be against reading, writing, and maths standards in schools. They will enable teachers to identify those children, and to provide good clear information to their parents so they can change what happens in the classroom and what happens in the home. Many teachers are, in fact, already doing this, but not all of them. In fact, the Education Review Office report from 2007 showed that almost half the schools were not doing this. There are two things I do not understand about national standards. The first is why, instead of trying to bully me in the House, Mr Mallard and the Labour Party\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ba40192440f4c5cbd8581dd4732e7f6\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am on my feet and there will be silence. I realise that there is some tense feeling over this issue, but members must not be accused of bullying each other in the House, because I would not tolerate that. If the honourable Minister has not finished her answer, I will allow her to continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217789945d02045638d9e04fe965417e6\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I will continue without that comment. Why Mr Mallard and the Labour Party are not getting behind the 150,000 children who are failing in our schools now, and why Mr Mallard and the Labour Party are not supporting parents\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022380152e61e1a4e298543b45827864f27\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am on my feet and there will be no further comment. The mouth was operating and no sound was coming out. The Minister is answering questions, not asking questions. When I allowed her to continue she proceeded to ask why the Labour Party is not doing this and not doing that. That is not the role of the Minister; the Minister\u2019s role is to answer questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022051069a78e48411e9b21a8a0b8443efd\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: If you look at the primary question, you will see that it asks me what I understand\u2014whether I understand and stand by all my statements. I am admitting to the member that there are a couple of things that I do not understand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225105fb45d58c428482fddd28c0398fce\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f97cd2351d684bc7a929b0ecb74551eb\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: There will be silence. That is not a valid point of order, at all. The member is starting to debate the issues. The Hon Trevor Mallard has the right to ask this question and the Minister\u2019s job is to answer it. Does the Hon Trevor Mallard have any further supplementary questions? [Interruption] No, I have ruled that she has finished answering the question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022334ac4fdf6b74928b16978de32d3806e\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s doing a runner; too embarrassed to stay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022500060ebca9044298590be5356a4578e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will resume his seat. I am getting a little tired of some of the interjection. I have been pretty patient today but that member was right beside an open microphone when he made that interjection. I will not tolerate that further. I ask the Hon Trevor Mallard to ask a supplementary question, or the member may lose it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb62a9accc0b4bf1ae5c1cce84e491d3\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: What will she say to parents who now have high-quality reports using asTTle and who will in the future be given lower-quality reports using her national standards, which have much less information on them as to the next steps for their children?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0079df2ab9b475e87d9e1577ca9eae9\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: Schools can provide parents with as much information as they like, as long as they report progress to parents against the national standards. That is a stupid question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022310d8e561eb447d484b63ab76b7ea163\u0022\u003ELouise Upston\u003C/span\u003E: What statements has she seen that suggest that national standards in literacy are needed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a1077fd2e924ae6912cbc293287c0c7\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I have seen a newsletter from the member who asked the primary question in which he talks about a union bus tour that he went on in the deep south. The newsletter, sent out from a Labour Party address, reveals that he cannot spell even the word \u201CInvercargill\u201D correctly. I have a copy of the reading and writing national standards and I am prepared to provide them to the member so he can do some homework. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022889e9d324d4d496ebf123b29909ede89\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Minister now tell the House what the added value is to parents who are already receiving a quality asTTle report of teachers being forced to prepare something based on her standards that is not as good?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228dedfae691da43b8baf6e2c323b9871e\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: Schools that are producing asTTle will continue to give parents as much information as they are giving them currently. However, one has only to talk to the hundreds of thousands of parents across the country who support the introduction of national standards to know that they want better information from their schools about how their children are doing. They are hungry for that information, and they back this Government, which is introducing national standards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e10bce10c094caeb3227bed5e8b16b9\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think you understand that it was a relatively simple question about added value for a particular group of parents: those who are already getting asTTle. That question was not addressed or answered. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cdf4cbee6c246539911c160162d8757\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: Right at the beginning of my answer I addressed that question. Schools can continue to give that group of parents that information. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ece7205ce16944af91765ab1f20b0b91\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022940a0fa3eb4247e4819ab4c4f74d7101\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I will not have answers relitigated by way of points of order. The member asked what additional value would be made available to parents through the national standards programme beyond the normal reporting under asTTle. Maybe the Minister could just address that, because the question did not really contain any other statements. The question was about the additional information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260d479100473426798b7fee1ce10b30f\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: In addition to the reporting against asTTle, parents will also receive reporting against the national standards. I thought that was self-explanatory. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002223d73aab45654fbdbb4521a0102ab137\u0022\u003EEarly Childhood Education\u2014Licensing Criteria for Creches in Shopping Malls and Gyms\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022 data-id=\u002207a28bdb8ff34b2eb15b6b018581d859\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003E8. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002207a28bdb8ff34b2eb15b6b018581d859\u0022\u003EALLAN PEACHEY (National\u2014T\u0101maki)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Education: What steps will the Government take to reduce red tape for creches in gyms and shopping malls?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022 data-id=\u00225ee4262e03834b13834e3c38da9a5709\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ee4262e03834b13834e3c38da9a5709\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education):\u003C/span\u003E This year we will introduce an amendment to the Education Act to remove the requirement for creches in shopping malls and gyms to comply with the Education (Early Childhood Services) Regulations. We know that parents expect short-term childcare centres at shopping malls and gyms to provide a babysitting service rather than an education, and this Government trusts parents to make good decisions for their children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c460ed95618a44a090e28be102d6a944\u0022\u003EAllan Peachey\u003C/span\u003E: What will these changes mean?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e27ae3e4e0f24957977ada1f26531c76\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: When the Education Act is amended, services in gyms and shopping malls that fit the criteria will no longer have to comply with the Education (Early Childhood Services) Regulations. The criteria are that no child attends for more than 2 hours a day, and that a parent or caregiver is on hand and is able to resume responsibility for a child at short notice. Centres can still choose to become licensed if that is what they want.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022237b7bcbdaf94800adf17a1e179f5ee8\u0022\u003EInvestors\u2014Protection\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022 data-id=\u0022f3d978592a1244999a41eae07dcd22c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E9. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f3d978592a1244999a41eae07dcd22c5\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour\u2014Christchurch East)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Commerce: What remedies, if any, are available to investors when company directors do not check an investment statement before it is released to the public, despite claims that he or she is involved in managing the investment on a day-to-day basis?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u0022b2870f66ce07484c8ac9b756b8886d6d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b2870f66ce07484c8ac9b756b8886d6d\u0022\u003EHon SIMON POWER (Minister of Commerce):\u003C/span\u003E There is no sanction for directors who merely do not check investment statements. However, I am advised that, in general, if an investment statement contains a misstatement, investors are able to bring a claim against directors for compensation for loss they may have suffered under section 56 of the Securities Act. In order not to be liable, the director would have to rely on narrow defences, such as proving that the investment statement was distributed without his or her knowledge or consent, or, alternatively, proving that the director believed on reasonable grounds that the statement was true. Even if there has been no loss, the Securities Act provides that the Securities Commission can seek a pecuniary penalty under section 56, and, potentially, lay criminal charges against directors under section 58 in relation to untrue statements. If a director does not check an investment statement, and that statement is found to be misleading or contain a misstatement, the directors could be liable for the misstatement under section 56 of the Securities Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b8ebc6d68aa48bdad2a9b60e35834dc\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen the statement on the DorchesterLife website stating that the Huljich KiwiSaver directors include \u201Chigh-calibre businessmen like Peter Huljich, Don Brash and John Banks, so your money is being managed day-to-day by a team of highly experienced investment professionals\u201D; if so, is he not concerned that the public may be misled by such statements?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241081969c5ee4b33805052b6f3d9bead\u0022\u003EHon SIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: I have not seen the statement the member refers to from that source, but I am aware of the more general statement that she refers to. The member will be aware that the Securities Commission inquiries are continuing into that issue, and on that basis it would be completely inappropriate for me to comment further. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228cd8277a1d6a4addbff6c61fe373435f\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: Is he aware that Mr Banks and Dr Brash are not merely celebrity directors, but that each is also a part-owner of the Huljich empire, and would he advise Mr Banks, in particular, to disclose his full interest, given his intention to stand for higher office later this year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d4a78ef48a5479e9fe29e04b6af79af\u0022\u003EHon SIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: It would be inappropriate for the Minister of Commerce to advise anybody in that situation while the Securities Commission inquiries continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226fdf11b564c746028df30f830577ed3b\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: Is he concerned about the potential loss of confidence in KiwiSaver as a result of the public statements of two high-profile former National MPs saying they did not know what was going on, and, in John Banks\u2019 case, allegations that he is running part of his mayoral campaign out of Huljich\u2019s offices?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022354da2cc92fb484cbc707b39a876a23f\u0022\u003EHon SIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: With regard to the second part of that question, I am unaware of that particular statement; with regard to the first part, it would be inappropriate, quite frankly, for anybody in this House, but particularly the Minister of Commerce, or, for that matter, the Minister of Finance, to offer a view on the relative merits of any KiwiSaver investment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223eac3faede2945588eaeafe996590f21\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 7 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022 data-id=\u00223092be6f9c9242759888cc5178eab5b4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223092be6f9c9242759888cc5178eab5b4\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave to table the Wise Up newsletter from Mr Mallard, which contains spelling mistakes that show the need for national standards in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2b5602c64764582bcb0f0065df4c63c\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: What is the source of the document?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221adc0f9ea5d04094be3e55500c61456c\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: It is from the Labour Party website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286ec439408f646fdb92c2956c2270aa3\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just recently I would not put leave to table a document in the House from a common blog site, and I do not see why I should change my view.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e574fd2f103474ca42a2df018793545\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Just to assist you, I say that the newsletter that the Minister refers to is a publication. It may appear on a website, but it is a publication in its own right. The Opposition is quite relaxed about her tabling it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022008c676dde5148039916fbe0821fc8a6\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought, then, to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022705881c232e84d5ab1bf22c91c648818\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 9 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022 data-id=\u0022d9024bda4df942728c234026c0ce5ed7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d9024bda4df942728c234026c0ce5ed7\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour\u2014Christchurch East):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave to table the statement from the DorchesterLife website that has the quote that I mentioned in my question, which the Minister said he had not heard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c396f8f9b394c5b9bb7dc5bd51a2906\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fa200cb51c3a4ff489d12edb099c2bcb\u0022\u003EEnvironment Canterbury\u2014Performance Review\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u0022bd0832f7862d43a6a66101e66cbf232f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E10. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bd0832f7862d43a6a66101e66cbf232f\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (National\u2014Rangitata)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for the Environment: What response has he received regarding the independent review of the performance of Environment Canterbury?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00229ae0929b89d748f2aac2bc7b767133c7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229ae0929b89d748f2aac2bc7b767133c7\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment):\u003C/span\u003E The report has been well received. All 10 of the Canterbury mayors, who originally sought intervention by the Government, have welcomed the report with a sense of relief that the problems with water management in Canterbury are now openly acknowledged. Secondly, stakeholders from across the environment and development spectrum\u2014including the Environmental Defence Society, the Water Rights Trust, Irrigation New Zealand, as well as Federated Farmers\u2014have concurred with its analysis of institutional failure. I also note that even some Environment Canterbury councillors have agreed with the criticisms and the review, and support change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235743299420a4e2398a4a2fbded396c4\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Government formed any view on the report; and what process does the Government have in place for addressing the review recommendations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a2248fd1e0c48758c316c3e3f34c739\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The Government endorses the view in the report that Canterbury\u2019s freshwater resources are of huge strategic importance not just to Canterbury but to New Zealand, and that this resource is not being well-managed. The report calls for urgent intervention by the Government, and this is being considered. Tomorrow I and the Minister of Local Government, Rodney Hide, will meet with Environment Canterbury, Canterbury mayors, water stakeholders, and Ng\u0101i Tahu to discuss the recommendations. Tomorrow I have also scheduled a meeting here in Wellington with the reviewers, and I have invited all Canterbury MPs to hear first hand why the reviewers came to those conclusions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ddbdaca8f0a2485489d8f92223378802\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: When were concerns first raised with the Minister about Environment Canterbury, and what led the Minister to initiate the independent review?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022632834de4a7048d3a532bf2914d660e5\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Concerns about Environment Canterbury were first raised with me by the Ministry for the Environment at my very first briefing as an incoming Minister. The ministry\u2019s concern was that Environment Canterbury did not have the capacity to manage the water quality and allocation issues in the region. Numerous organisations have subsequently raised concerns. A report last year showed that only 29 percent of consents in Canterbury were being processed on time\u2014the worst of New Zealand\u2019s 85 councils, and in September, there was a letter from all 10 Canterbury mayors. All those factors triggered the Government\u2019s decision to initiate a formal review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227835734d1ac440d986435ca5f716ddc0\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: What did the Minister discuss with the chairman of Environment Canterbury, the former National MP Alec Neill\u2014who has pre-empted the Minister by publicly stating that it is unlikely there will be elections for Environment Canterbury this year\u2014when he met with Mr Neill, in secret, on the evening of Sunday, 21 February?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223099131f16794f5a9601f52b4536ef32\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: All the mayors of Canterbury met on Sunday night, and Bob Parker, the Mayor of Christchurch, thought that it would be good for me to go down to Christchurch and have an informal discussion with them about the report. The Government is of a view that we need to liaise closely not just with the chairman of Environment Canterbury but with all 10 mayors. The truth is that I have had regular discussions with all those mayors, including the chair of Environment Canterbury. I think people would expect an environment Minister to have discussions with the chair of an authority that has been in some difficulty for many years but was ignored by members opposite\u2014hence the mess we have in water management.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229403fb43e42d45b7962c48d6d0b84789\u0022\u003EMining in Conservation Areas\u2014Minister\u2019s Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u00225ec96c66b3c646438265b72017f27c53\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E11. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ec96c66b3c646438265b72017f27c53\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Does he stand by his statement that \u201CI have made it clear that the Government has no intention of mining high-value conservation land\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00220e9ae32a55144ee2850a51b106db2aad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220e9ae32a55144ee2850a51b106db2aad\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources):\u003C/span\u003E Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b32284075864f8484e802f571b68a7c\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: What did the Minister\u2019s colleague Nick Smith say to the Minister when he told him that he was considering altering schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act to exclude parts of the Kahurangi National Park in order to allow easier access for mining; and is the Minister, unlike Nick Smith, able to rule out boundary changes for the Kahurangi National Park, or alterations to schedule 4 that would allow easier access for mining within the park?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220086ac812b0a4a37be9b9b18e44e8365\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: The answer to that question will ultimately be made by the people of New Zealand, who will be asked to respond to a discussion document that the Government intends to release early next month.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aef2087c07164448904dbb25fcbe3c34\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question simply asked the Minister to tell the House what his ministerial colleague Nick Smith had said about Kahurangi National Park, but the question simply was not addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a6ecd2e3690475980d2d55213f42d31\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, in fairness to the honourable member, the problem I have with members seeking my help with answers to questions is that too often they get up and say on a point of order that \u201CMy question was this.\u201D, but in fact there was a whole lot more to the question than that. Ministers are entitled to answer whichever part of a question they choose. Members will observe that where very precise questions are asked, I have been pretty tough on Ministers in requiring them to deliver an answer to those questions. But the discipline lies with the questioner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224090ceb47d3a457aad57888bec8cf0da\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen any statements in support of mining on conservation land?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214c5e015302345019d81f32c61c2dc57\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I have. I have seen a statement from the Hon Phil Goff, which says: \u201CI think most New Zealanders want to see a balance. They want to see some areas that are less sensitive in the conservation estate available to environmentally sensitive mining.\u201D However, I have also seen a statement from the member who asked the primary question, Mr Charles Chauvel, in which he says: \u201CWhat we will not do is permit exploration or mining on the conservation estate.\u201D Mr Chauvel seems to forget that under Labour there were no fewer than 82 mines on conservation land. I suggest that Mr Chauvel makes it clear to the House whether he or the Leader of the Opposition speaks for the party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229156fedae10747f48ceb2cc02f0d6398\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: At any time when Cabinet discussed and considered the issue of mining on conservation land, or any other issue relating to mining or access for mining on Crown land, did Murray McCully or any other Minister declare a conflict of interest and excuse himself from the relevant decisions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246d0c501155848d6b23253464aec3c63\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Not to my recollection, and, what is more, at this stage I do not recall that there has been that type of discussion when Mr McCully has been present. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225576aafc407a43ebbbfbf5f9a09011b7\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree that given the value of New Zealand\u2019s oil exports, any proposed oil exploration on schedule 4 land should be treated on a case by case basis and not rejected out of hand in a knee-jerk political reaction?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea4d13711005489da2f7b57ca3948095\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: The member makes a very good point in that case by case would be the basis on which any decisions might eventually be made. But in the first instance there will be a public consultation process, and the Government looks forward to broad participation in that process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a941abfebecf4f90956e6d2de75df371\u0022\u003EBuilding\u2014Government Assistance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022 data-id=\u00220e32647eec6b4ce2a575bb58d74efbae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003E12. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220e32647eec6b4ce2a575bb58d74efbae\u0022\u003EJACQUI DEAN (National\u2014Waitaki)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Building and Construction: What is the Government doing to assist New Zealanders to build quality homes and buildings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u00229777356c9614433abfd375ca0e8fd1ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229777356c9614433abfd375ca0e8fd1ee\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister for Building and Construction):\u003C/span\u003E Better building safety and quality is the focus of a series of initiatives collectively known as the Better Building Blueprint. In August last year I announced a comprehensive review of the Building Act. I made it clear that, without compromising safety and quality, the Government was looking to reduce both the cost and the complexity of the consenting process, and to ensure that responsibility sits with the person who does the job. The misery that the weathertightness problem has caused for many New Zealand homeowners is an ongoing reminder to us all of the need to ensure that our buildings are dependable and of good quality. On Friday I will be releasing a discussion document that proposes how to achieve just that. The Government wants to discuss these ideas with New Zealanders. The public must be able to have confidence in the system, which is why I want their input into the proposals.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022786c652fe08d4a20bb514a6735706fce\u0022\u003EJacqui Dean\u003C/span\u003E: What are the other Better Building Blueprint initiatives?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222eeb012515764420899c6738389a66e0\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: I am delighted to say that so far this year we have introduced a streamlined licensing system for builders. Becoming a licensed practitioner will be much easier for builders and tradespeople who are qualified and have a good track record. A robust licensing scheme with a critical mass of licensed builders will give us, and give consumers, extra confidence that homes and buildings are built right, first time. We have also introduced a streamlined national multiple-use approval service for volume builders, so that, without compromising safety or quality, multi-proof, fast-tracked building consents for standard multiple-use building designs are issued just the once, saving a lot of time and money for consumers, who do not have to get multiple consents. On 5 March 2010 we will be launching a new, simple house compliance system for the first time, which brings together in one place all the information needed to design a simple house, including compliance requirements and building standards. It offers an efficient, practical path to build affordable homes of good quality in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229404762ec0864f2cb2b52365f6fe7dce\u0022\u003EUrgent Debates Declined\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b4532ca65af64b309d9f7537dd0b077b\u0022\u003EEnvironment Canterbury, Report on Performance\u2014Establishment of Ministerial Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u002261675c28ec00450da18b3d2e2ff50d40\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002261675c28ec00450da18b3d2e2ff50d40\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have received a letter from the Hon Shane Jones seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the decision to establish a committee of Ministers to consider the recommendations to the Government in the report entitled Investigation of the Performance of Environment Canterbury under the Resource Management Act and Local Government Act. This is a particular case of recent occurrence and involves the administrative responsibility of the Government. The report has been received and a committee of Ministers has been established to consider the report\u2019s recommendations. However, the Government has not yet formed a view on the major changes proposed in the report. Although on occasions the release of a report may warrant an urgent debate, the circumstances must be exceptional. Although the issue is an important one, the time to consider this report\u2019s recommendations will be when decisions on them are made and any necessary legislation comes before the House. In these circumstances I do not believe that setting aside the House\u2019s business for an urgent debate today can be justified. The application is therefore declined.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e880b24fa3a14d9fb7113f5b269145bc\u0022\u003EAppointments\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fc8e57b9debd47348340203e890ffc54\u0022\u003EChief Ombudsman and Ombudsman\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022310d523c5bb44172867581d5fed1c95a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022310d523c5bb44172867581d5fed1c95a\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That, pursuant to sections 3 and 5(2) of the Ombudsmen Act 1975, this House recommend His Excellency the Governor-General reappoint Ms Beverley Anne Wakem, CBE, of Wellington, as an Ombudsman and as Chief Ombudsman with effect from 1 March 2010. Ms Wakem is a very distinguished servant of the New Zealand public. She has been an Ombudsman since 2005, having previously been a chief executive of Radio New Zealand from the early 1980s until 1991 and then embarking on an equally distinguished career in the private sector. She has been Chief Ombudsman since 2005, when she was appointed to that position by this House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe Office of the Ombudsmen is a very important organ of State and also an important advocate for the protections that New Zealanders expect inside our democracy. It is an organisation that is able to conduct, free of charge, examinations into all manner of requests from the public that relate to the activities of governance in this country. It is also the organisation that has the greatest influence on the application of the Official Information Act. It is therefore an organisation that does have to have people of the highest calibre and highest integrity working within its office. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EMs Wakem has now fulfilled that role for a period with some distinction, and I understand that today there will be a unanimous decision by the House to reappoint her. That, I think, indicates the level of confidence that we have not only in Ms Wakem herself but also in the Office of the Ombudsmen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe Government is very pleased to move this motion. We look forward to its smooth passage this afternoon, and we take this opportunity to offer Ms Wakem and her fellow Ombudsmen our best wishes as they go about their important work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022bbbaefa85e274367aa3b87469f4f3bde\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bbbaefa85e274367aa3b87469f4f3bde\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The Labour Opposition is in support of the motion moved by the Leader of the House to reappoint Beverley Anne Wakem CBE of Wellington for a further term as Ombudsman and also to continue in her role as Chief Ombudsman. The Leader of the House has outlined the important traditions of this job and we greatly respect and value the independence of the Office of the Ombudsmen. It is a remarkably important job in our country and in our system of constitutional arrangements, which are, of course, not written, so conventions of jobs and positions such as these are very, very important. New Zealand took on the role of having an Ombudsman in the early 1960s, from Scandinavia, and since that time the people who have filled those positions have acted with great honour and integrity, and have reinforced the decision of the New Zealand Government to set up such an office. As noted by Palmer and Palmer, in their book Bridled Power, Ombudsmen are Parliament\u2019s people; they are separate from the executive branch of Government, and that is absolutely crucial. They are appointed by the Officers of Parliament Committee. Their budget is set independently of the executive Government. It is determined by the Officers of Parliament Committee, which is chaired by the Speaker, and for which unanimity or near-unanimity is required in order for decisions to be taken around both the appointment and funding of that office. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EIn our system of Government, even under proportional representation, it is very important for the Opposition to be able to rely on both the Official Information Act and questions for written answer, in order to elucidate information from the executive Government to fulfil the Opposition\u2019s constitutional duty to hold the Government of the day to account and to have the ability to propose new ideas for the country to consider. Where there are disputes between the executive Government and the Opposition, the fall-back mechanism that the Opposition has is obviously the Speaker, in the first instance, in respect of questions for written answer, and, second, the Office of the Ombudsmen for Official Information Act requests where there is disagreement between a particular Minister\u2019s office or department and a member of Parliament who is seeking that information. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ESo the Opposition not only values but relies on the unrelenting professionalism with which the Office of the Ombudsmen deals with our requests and complaints from time to time, as they occur. We know that it is a very heavy workload. There are many calls on the time of the Ombudsmen, and, from time to time over the years, the Office of the Ombudsmen, in reporting to the Officers of Parliament Committee, has made the point that, for example, the area of advocacy or recourse that prisoners have is often through the Office of the Ombudsmen, and that is a very heavy workload for the Ombudsmen to deal with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThere are members of the public who take up issues with the Ombudsman if their Official Information Act request is considered not to have been taken in the manner in which the applicant would have liked. As I mentioned before, Opposition MPs through the course of time have regularly used that as a reference point for areas where there has been disagreement. It might be possible or tempting for the Office of the Ombudsmen to occasionally look upon requests from the Opposition as a lower priority than those of other members of society.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a6529d146d64a85802bae73b54402bf\u0022\u003EHon Parekura Horomia\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, no, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222fbf6641c97453c9fde5faf72f229b9\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: My colleagues are saying \u201CNo, no, no\u201D, and I am sure they are right. We believe that one of the fundamental aspects of the regime is that any New Zealander can take a complaint to the Ombudsman and that things that come in from Opposition members of Parliament are as important as those that come in from any member of the public. There is no hierarchy of requests. This is an office that acts for everybody. I think the fact that so many other agencies, even some in the private sector, have looked to use the term \u201Combudsman\u201D for resolution of their own complaints process shows just the integrity with which this office has earned its place in our constitutional affairs since 1962. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EBeverley Wakem is a thoroughly decent and hard-working person of great integrity. We welcome her reappointment to the role. We look forward to working with her, following in the footsteps as she does of many distinguished New Zealanders\u2014principally, of course, the late John Belgrave, who served with great honour and distinction, and who, sadly, passed away in 2008. It is a moment to remember those who have held the job, but also for the House to come together and wish Beverley Wakem and her team well\u2014particularly her, seeing this motion refers directly to her appointment\u2014for the important role they fulfil. I am sure she will continue to be Parliament\u2019s person, and her office will continue to be Parliament\u2019s people, as we have come to expect, because that is fundamental to the business of our Government in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002292557bd5-0e66-473c-a6df-7d108e7822e3\u0022 data-id=\u002298de8a3ba7a641f2873f073bd461eee5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292557bd5-0e66-473c-a6df-7d108e7822e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002298de8a3ba7a641f2873f073bd461eee5\u0022\u003EDr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Green Party supports the reappointment of Beverley Anne Wakem as the Chief Ombudsman. Having a strong independent watchdog is vital in ensuring that our democracy functions appropriately. It is important that there are independent checks on the power of the executive, especially under a Westminster system that relies heavily on convention, as ours does. We simply wish her well in seeking out the truth in her work and holding those in power to account for their actions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022 data-id=\u0022ce58d134a9454ae6b4d89276e4f4845f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ce58d134a9454ae6b4d89276e4f4845f\u0022\u003ERAHUI KATENE (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tonga):\u003C/span\u003E Almost 2 years ago, on 17 April 2008, Te Ururoa Flavell spoke in the House of the support the M\u0101ori Party had for the appointment of Beverley Wakem as Chief Ombudsman. In that speech, Mr Flavell said: \u201CWe wish her great courage in continuing to tackle the truth, to be curious, to be sceptical, and to not be sidetracked by the political spin.\u201D I am delighted to observe that Ms Wakem has certainly lived up to the challenge set out by the M\u0101ori Party that day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EAs a former chief executive of Radio New Zealand, and having come from an impressive career in broadcasting and public relations, Beverley Wakem was used to shaping the news rather than being the focus of the news herself. But in December 2008 her decision to tackle the truth about the role of public servants in relation to Official Information Act requests catapulted her head first into the news. Ms Wakem suggested that some public servants were playing games with Official Information Act requests. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EOut of her professional curiosity, tempered with the requisite scepticism, she confronted the situation by announcing that the Office of the Ombudsmen was concerned that some parts of the Public Service had been deliberately delaying responses to Official Information Act requests. In the office\u2019s annual report to Parliament, Chief Ombudsman Beverley Wakem subsequently concluded that the practice was unacceptable and subverted the purpose of the legislation. She identified what she described as a regrettable tendency to game the system and delay responses until the complainant\u2019s interest in the matter had passed. It is statements like that that demonstrate the determination of Ms Wakem to bring sharp intellectual rigour and moral fortitude to the role of Chief Ombudsman. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThe name of the Office of the Ombudsmen, Te Tari-o-Ng\u0101 Kaitiaki Mana Tangata, tells us that it is an office that gives priority to the protection and promotion of the rights of people. It is a name that expresses the importance of the guardian caring for the overall good of the people. Another attribute that we see in the work of Ms Wakem is that not only is she prepared to make public statements but she goes one step further and tries to introduce strategies and support to help address any issues she identifies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EAs a classic example of this, it is perhaps useful to go back to the statement about Official Information Act requests. Although noting the disappointment that the office had with the way in which Official Information Act requests were being issued, the office immediately conducted a series of briefings with public sector chief executives and representatives of political parties and published guidance material to help improve understanding and practice in this area. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EWhether it was a direct result of those workshops is unknown, but it is of interest to note that the number of complaints received under the Official Information Act increased by 10 percent over the past year to 897. How agencies deal with requests and communicate with those requesting the information is a critical part of the role. It is perhaps worrying that after 25 years of the Official Information Act being enacted, some Government agencies are still not responding appropriately, but that is a debate for another day. For the purposes of this debate we merely seek to congratulate Bev Wakem on the influence she has already brought to bear as Chief Ombudsman. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThe Office of the Ombudsmen plays a critical role in the lives of many New Zealanders. The M\u0101ori Party has the most profound respect for the work of the people who fulfil this role. The challenges they face are significant: investigating complaints about the decisions of central and local government agencies and Ministers of the Crown, and taking responsibility to tackle the truth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThe Office of the Ombudsmen encourages citizen participation in the democratic process. It maintains the decorum of respect that we would expect to see between individuals and agencies. For all these reasons, we are happy to add our support to the motion to endorse Bev Wakem in this important role.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002231a8aa0010ae4351b058b1959c049555\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002281353a8f438f48acad44150f3f3e6eb7\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022e13ca3a9830449b88ed7ee29356982ac\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e13ca3a9830449b88ed7ee29356982ac\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That urgency be accorded the passing through their remaining stages of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill, the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill, the Judicial Matters Bill, and the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, the interrupted first reading of the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill, the second reading of the Inquiries Bill, and the first readings of the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Bill and the Securities Trustees and Statutory Supervisors Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThis is quite a large body of work. I know that the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill will be vigorously debated in the House. It is the Government\u2019s wish to see this bill passed. We believe we have support for that and that must be tested in Parliament. But the reason for advancing it this week is that Parliament is about to go into a 2-week adjournment. That would mean that if we do not pass the bill in this block of time, those who are responsible for its enactment would be under far too great a pressure for it to be effective on 1 April. Although ensuring there is such pressure might be the objective of the Opposition, it is certainly not the objective of the Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill essentially brings in new corrective arrangements for young people. It is highly popular among the population in New Zealand, and people are eagerly expecting it to be enacted as quickly as possible. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill needs to go through all of its stages so that those responsible for administering student loans at this very important time of the year have a degree of clarity about how that should occur. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe interrupted debate on the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill is one that should be completed in order that the bill gets to a select committee before we go into that long adjournment. This bill was taken over by the Government from Mr Simon Bridges, and it deals with dreadful instances of extreme animal cruelty, like those that have occurred in recent times. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe other bills need to be progressed in order for them to make sufficient progress on the Order Paper for their passing in due time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EFor those reasons, the Government seeks urgency in this case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222e1bd48388d5457a91b5102739eb539c\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That urgency be accorded.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a268de4b44ab472d91713ad7e2bd2e4b\u0022\u003EInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002299b3f992ec3745d18ed6d06bbc7369b7\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022260538825fab4cff9bca8b094915f2a7\u0022\u003EPart 1  Amendments to principal Act\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00220b70abe65ef14217bdf5fcb6b968f25a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b70abe65ef14217bdf5fcb6b968f25a\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I relish the opportunity to debate Part 1, both to flush out some of the nonsense that Labour members have been running on this issue and also to put the case fairly and squarely about the sensible and balanced reforms in this bill. I make no apologies for the core driver behind the bill being the need to improve the affordability of the accident compensation scheme, and to reduce the pressure on levies this year and in coming years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThere can be no question that Labour allowed accident compensation costs to get out of control. Over the past 4 years claim costs have risen by 57 percent, or by over a billion dollars extra per year. This rate of claim cost increases is five times the rate of inflation. Labour somehow pretends that we can have those sorts of increases in claim costs, but that it will not cost so much as a penny for motorists, for workers, and for the businesses that pay the levies. But that is fairyland stuff, and it illustrates just how financially illiterate Opposition members are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe last annual report of June 2008, a report signed by the previous Minister for ACC, Maryan Street, declared a loss of $2.4 billion 6 months prior to there being any change of Government. For that member to then stand in the House last week and say that Labour left accident compensation in good financial shape was just a nonsense, and it is untrue. Then just months later, after that $2.4 billion loss, Labour engaged in an irresponsible and reckless pre-election lolly scramble. Labour made over a dozen changes to the scheme to make it more generous and to extend entitlements without making any provision to fund them. Part of this bill is unwinding some of those unfunded extensions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EMembers opposite have referred to this bill as a complete dismantling of accident compensation, as breaking the social contract, and as ripping up the Woodhouse report, but that is all just political hyperbole. Let us just go through and debate what is in the bill. Firstly, this bill pushes out the full funding date from 2014 to 2019, in order to take the pressure off levies, and, secondly, the bill pulls back on those extra entitlements that Labour added in the dying days of its Government but never funded. I am really looking forward to debating the clauses on holiday pay, on seasonal workers, on the tests for rehabilitation when people go back to work, and on the provisions about self-inflicted harm and suicide. I think that fair-minded New Zealanders, on weighing up the rights of injured claimants and the rights of levy payers, will come to the conclusion that what is in this bill is fair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003ELet me put a few essential questions that we need to debate in these Committee changes. The first is whether people should be better off on accident compensation than they were when in work. Was that what the Woodhouse report and our accident compensation scheme was all about? Members on this side of the Chamber say no; members on that side of the Chamber say yes, they should be. It is a very simple question. Should criminals be able to get accident compensation lump sums and income compensation for injuries they suffered when committing crimes? Members on our side of the Chamber say no; members on Labour\u2019s side of the Chamber say that accident compensation should be for crims. A third question that is at the core of this Committee debate is whether businesses with a good safety record should get a lower level of levy than those businesses that have a bad safety record. Members on my side of the Chamber say yes, they should, whereas Labour members say they should not. Again, I say I am looking forward to debating all of those issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe changes in this bill are about securing for New Zealand an accident compensation scheme that is fair for levy payers and fair for claimants\u2014a scheme that is affordable in the long term and does not just pass the bill on to some future generation, or, worse still, pretends that nobody pays, which seems to be where Labour is at. This bill is about securing a fair accident compensation scheme, and one that is affordable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI have tabled a Supplementary Order Paper. One of the first changes I want to make is to call this bill what I think all members in the Committee would call it, and that is the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. You see, in 2001, in that sort of stroke and fever for political correctness, we changed the name of the Act to the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act. The most interesting thing is that going back to 2001, do members know that rehabilitation rates have got worse in every single year since? Do members know that injury prevention has been so unsuccessful that injury prevention rates have got worse over the succeeding 9 years? You see, members opposite somehow believed that if we just changed the name of the Act, we would fix the problem. Members on this side of the Chamber say that we should call the Act what it was called for all those years, and not play these silly games of political correctness and of renaming Acts away from what ordinary New Zealanders would prefer them to be called. Let us call accident compensation what New Zealanders call it, albeit there is not a member of the Government who does not believe that rehabilitation and injury prevention are important. It is just that we have to do more than change the name of an Act to make some progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe last point I note in respect of the Supplementary Order Paper is the change that we are making with regard to the safety levy for motorcycles. The reality is that the record of motorcycle safety over the last decade is a tragedy for dozens of New Zealand families. At the same time that we have seen a 20 percent decline in the overall road toll, we have seen a 20 percent increase in the number of motorcycle accidents and fatalities. The state of Victoria has gone down the track we are taking, and it is the only state in Australia that has been able to reverse the trend of motorcycle accidents. My view is that the provision in the Supplementary Order Paper, which came as a consequence of discussions with leaders of such organisations as the Bikers Rights Organisation of New Zealand and the Ulysses Club, is a very constructive way in which we can make progress on injury prevention and try to reverse that trend in motorcycle accidents. The trend is not only costing the scheme a great deal of money but causing a great deal of heartache for dozens, if not hundreds, of New Zealand families.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThis is a fair, balanced bill. The Supplementary Order Paper improves this bill; the Committee should pass it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u0022f3522b37b6284aa987c087300e4d15d9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f3522b37b6284aa987c087300e4d15d9\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The Minister who has just resumed his seat has misrepresented the Labour Party position in a number of ways. I do not, in this first call, have a chance to respond to all of the accusations he made as to the Labour Party position that were incorrect. I think history shows that through the more than 30 years that we have had the accident compensation system in New Zealand, Labour has consistently stood by the principles that lay behind its foundation, because those principles are fair\u2014and we continue to do so. The Minister made it clear that his justification for the changes that are made to the scheme is that it costs too much as it is, and therefore cannot be afforded. Yet not one submitter\u2014or the department in its original submission\u2014presented any evidence to the select committee to show that it is more expensive for employers in New Zealand than it is for employers in overseas schemes. Indeed, it took the Opposition\u2019s questions of officials to get some information as to cost comparisons. We would think that if cost was being used as the basis of the justification for drastically reducing the entitlements that people have and need following an accident in New Zealand, robust information would be provided to the select committee. It was not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI was also disappointed that neither business submitters like Business New Zealand\u2014and I name Business New Zealand not to be pejorative; I value its submission to the select committee\u2014nor any other business representative who made submissions gave us any information as to comparative costs. That surprised and saddened me. Amongst its members are multinational companies that operate not just in New Zealand but also in Australia, Canada, and other jurisdictions around the world. Those submitters would have had, had they desired to get it through their contacts, information on the relative costs in New Zealand and overseas. From their failure to do so, we cannot conclude anything other than that the New Zealand scheme, even in its present state, is cheaper than alternatives overseas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EWe explored that a bit through the officials. They provided us with the best information they had as to comparisons with Australia. This came from information that was presented to the Workplace Relations Ministers Council in 2008, which I understand is a meeting between Australian and New Zealand officials. It showed that the cost per $100 of earnings was significantly higher in Australia in 2006-07 than in New Zealand. That year was chosen because I think it was the last date for which they had comparable information. The average for Australia was $1.73 per $100 of earnings, whereas in New Zealand it is 94c per $100 of earnings. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be6849ee9e5249a9badc522c8c85d7de\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: And what does it exclude? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ba78bbdd39147948d97268c1c76ca62\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: That excludes motor vehicle accidents on both sides of the Tasman. In terms of the advice that officials gave us, it was full costing for the year of claims in the 2006-07 year. It excluded the tail\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa09596d52e34d30a22ba8d081946a83\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2282fef1cde4e5b9f995d8888d3a6fb\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Dr Smith, if he does not already understand this\u2014and as he says, \u201COh!\u201D, using the microphone to his advantage, as he is not meant to do as the Minister in the chair\u2014that it excludes the historic tail because, of course, the historic tail is a different pool to be funded. In terms of the full cost of 2006-07 accidents, they were meant to be fully paid in New Zealand at 94c, and the comparative cost was $1.73 per $100 of earnings. So where is the justification for reducing entitlements compared with Australia? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EWe hear from the Government that New Zealand is always a poor performer compared with Australia. In some areas that is true, but in the area of accident compensation it is not. We have a more efficient scheme. It is cheaper to administer. We know from the PricewaterhouseCoopers report\u2014and, again, the select committee had this information\u2014that the administrative costs of the accident compensation scheme are amongst the lowest, if not the lowest, in the world. That is one of the reasons why levies are lower compared with the service that is provided than is the case in overseas jurisdictions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EWe know that, at least currently, it does not make a profit. At present, the Government-owned Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) is the provider of cover for risk. It does not make a profit. It covers its costs, including the full costs of accidents. There is a problem in New Zealand with a declining rate of rehabilitation. That is a matter the Minister referred to, and I acknowledge it. Rehabilitation rates for long-term injuries have declined at approximately 1 percent per annum over recent years. That is a trend that is also true in overseas jurisdictions. We know that it is, in part, a consequence of aging populations. As people age they both break more easily and take longer to recover after they are injured. Both of those things are realities. That does not mean to say that we should not strive to do even better in terms of achieving better rehabilitation rates. Labour certainly does not oppose measures to improve rehabilitation rates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003ENone the less, it remains true that costs for employers are significantly lower per $100 of earnings in New Zealand than in Australia. Of course, Australians earn higher wages as well, but I am not making a comparison on total wages. I am making it, for that reason, on the basis of per $100 of earnings. Even on that basis, rates are lower for New Zealand employers. I ask the Minister how it can be justified to decrease further the rates for New Zealand employers, effectively at the cost of injured people and the State. We already know that even under existing rules, many of the people who are exited from the accident compensation scheme end up on unemployment benefits, at a cost to taxpayers rather than employers. We already know that many of the people who are exited from the scheme do not get back into work and are left languishing on benefits. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003ENo system is perfect. We readily acknowledge that there are always ways in which the scheme can be improved, but there is no justification for changing the threshold from 35 hours per week to 30 hours per week. That is the number of hours at which people will be deemed to be work-ready for full-time work. Currently they have to be able to work 35 hours a week; that will go down to 30 hours per week. This will be amplified by other contributions later, in concert with the fact that now accident compensation will not have to have regard to pre-accident earnings. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EEffectively, someone could be earning quite a good income on a salary. The example given by a submitter was a bank teller, who might suffer an occupational overuse injury and cannot work for some period. If the bank needs someone to fill that person\u2019s role and he or she is effectively laid off work, so becoming reliant on accident compensation, that person can be pushed off the scheme when deemed to be work-ready because he or she can work for 30 hours per week, even if he or she was working 40 hours per week previously\u2014and ACC will no longer have to have regard to that person\u2019s pre-accident earnings. So effectively such a person could be forced off the scheme when he or she is able to be a shelf-stacker at a supermarket or something like that, working for the minimum wage. Of course, the levies will go down for the employer, but the level of compensation received by the injured worker will be completely inadequate, and that is unjustified. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u002245ad8ff35bc14358a77f427ec4cdbd6b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002245ad8ff35bc14358a77f427ec4cdbd6b\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I want to gun straight down into the debate on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill because the speech made by Mr Parker showed exactly the sort of area where we do need to have a free and frank debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI have some questions for the Labour members. In 2001, they changed the law to the 35-hour test from the 30-hour test. They changed it so that it went up. My simple question to those members is around the fact the Department of Statistics, during the entire period of the previous Labour Government, said that people were in full-time work when they worked 30 hours, and in the Work and Income office, in respect of the invalids benefit and the sickness benefit, it is a matter of Labour policy that 30 hours a week is full time. So why should the person who suffers from cancer and is talking with the Work and Income officer about whether he or she is able to go back to full-time work have the test of 30 hours a week, but an accident victim has a test of 35 hours a week? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd494861f96143fc9cfbbee16f1c361e\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Because they used to work 35 hours.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff8cc483584f4184b6ba6ef6bf1dd287\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: That member needs to be able to answer that key point. We see from the Government that the Inland Revenue Department, Statistics New Zealand, and Work and Income New Zealand are all saying 30 hours a week. Why should the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) be any different? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe second point, in response to Mr Parker\u2019s contribution, is that he puts a great deal of weight on the data between New Zealand and Australia, but only in relation to the work account. Every time Labour members get to their feet to talk about accident compensation the only thing they want to talk about is the work account, which is about a quarter only of the accident compensation scheme. The earners account, I say to Mr Parker, is in the most trouble. The earners account is paid for by ordinary hard-working New Zealanders and is quite a regressive tax. As people go on to earn higher incomes, they are not hit as hard by the earners account. So it is ordinary workers who are paying for these sorts of costs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EBut the real issue I want to gun in on is why is it that Labour members think crims should get accident compensation. I think every New Zealander has sat back, looked at Graeme Burton, seen the way in which accident compensation has provided him with a free leg, and then seen the way that he has gone on and attempted to murder others, and, overwhelmingly, New Zealanders have said that is not right. Labour members say that the law as it is, is OK. Do they know how many cases there have been when a person committing a crime has not gone under the accident compensation scheme in the last 10 years? It is true that such people can apply to the court, and the court can make a ruling. How many in the last 10 years? It is zero\u2014absolutely zip. So Labour members are arguing that the current law works fine, yet in 10 years there has not been a single case where the court has imposed disentitlement. The last court case involved a person convicted of dangerous driving that resulted in very serious injuries. ACC took it to court and asked that the lump-sum payment that that person was entitled to not be provided. The court said that the test in the current law is so high the person should receive his or her lump-sum payment. So, effectively, Labour members are saying that law is OK and crims who injure themselves should be able to get lump-sum payments, income compensation, and full rehabilitation. In my view, that is wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003ELet us go back to the founding of the accident compensation scheme. It was about losing the right to sue. If I commit a criminal act, who do I sue? Who will I sue to try to get some compensation payment? National members say that the community does not owe compensation to those who injure themselves when committing serious crimes, and that, along with the hundreds of letters that I have seen from New Zealanders, is why I say there is support for that sensible change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u00228e1cea4e8322495bb6bb5ba51b4f061e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228e1cea4e8322495bb6bb5ba51b4f061e\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E There was so much that was wrong with that last speech from the Minister for ACC that it almost beggars belief. I will start at the beginning of this process. The accident compensation system is one that, we all know, is second to none in the world. It is something that other countries aspire to; they wish that they had been visionary enough to put it in place 40 years ago, as New Zealand did. The Injury, Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill offends against each and every one of the five principles that the accident compensation system is predicated upon. Not one fundamental principle of our accident compensation system is not infringed, broken, or damaged by this bill. The first of the principles underlying the accident compensation scheme is community responsibility. They also include real compensation, complete rehabilitation, comprehensive entitlement, and administrative efficiency. I will deal with each of these.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe community responsibility principle was the one that Owen Woodhouse and his commissioners outlined beautifully in the Woodhouse report. It was about the fact that workers should be compensated for injuries because they cease to be productive economic units when they are out of the workplace. He extrapolated beyond that to include women. In fact, if one reads the Woodhouse report, one sees that the mores of the time are reflected in it in that the expectation was that women would be at home and that men would be in the paid workforce. In order to accommodate women who were supporting the productive worker\u2014to use the old term\u2014the accident compensation system was extended to non-work injuries. That was how it came to cover non-work injuries. The community responsibility principle meant that everybody shared. If we all paid a little, we all would get a lot. The motorcyclist who comes off his or her bike is welcome to my share of the earners levy, because there may be a time when the amount that he or she pays is of benefit to me when I have a motor accident or a non - work-related accident, for example. What everybody pays in as an earner or as a motor vehicle owner benefits everybody. I am happy to work on that basis. This legislation offends that principle by the fact that it is predicated on a private insurance model. National cannot get past the idea that we are talking about State-funded insurance, and it would like to hand it over to the private sector as soon as possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe second principle is real compensation. Clause 55 offends against real compensation. I ask members and the Associate Minister for ACC, who is sitting in the chair, to think about that. Clause 55 addresses compensation for casual workers. If anything in this bill does not look like real compensation, it is this clause. It reduces the kind of compensation that a casual or part-time worker can expect to get. I will elaborate on that a little bit later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EClause 4 offends against complete rehabilitation. There is reference to the move from 35 hours to 30 hours. The Minister was talking about workers who had worked 35 or more hours a week being considered to have worked full-time; that is because they were working 35 or more hours prior to their accident or their injury. What we will have now is not complete rehabilitation back to working 35 hours in the job they were working in before, but partial rehabilitation back to working 30 hours in some other occupation. So that is another principle offended against, and infringed by, this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe fourth principle is comprehensive entitlement. Let us look at clause 6 in Part 1 to see whether it refers to comprehensive entitlement. Clause 6 refers to hearing loss of 6 percent or more that has been caused by a personal injury. According to audiologists, and also, I believe, submitters who came before the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, 6 percent represents considerable hearing loss. I ask why people who, because of injury, have a hearing loss of just under 6 percent should not be able to access hearing aids and devices to allow them to hear comprehensively, which they were able to do before their injury. That infringes and offends against the principle of comprehensive entitlement. Now one cannot have a 1 percent, 2 percent, 3 percent, 4 percent, or 5 percent hearing loss; it has to be 6 percent or more to get compensation. That is not comprehensive entitlement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe fifth principle that is offended by this legislation is administrative efficiency. What was broken? The overseas comparison that was done by PricewaterhouseCoopers showed, in fact, that our accident compensation scheme worked at a higher level of efficiency and rate of return than any comparable system overseas. So it was not broken. What this bill will do is create disputes. It will create a crowd of people who want to sue. It will open the door to pressure to sue and will create an administrative nightmare. In that respect, this bill offends against the principle of administrative efficiency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EWhen an organisation is deemed to be as efficient as the Accident Compensation Corporation is in administering the scheme, then there is no need for the comprehensive, wholesale reduction represented by this legislation. This legislation is about people paying more and getting less. It is about increasing levies where they did not need to be increased\u2014and I will come back to that point in a later speech\u2014and, at every turn, depriving New Zealanders of entitlements that allow people time to recover, time to rehabilitate, time to get back into the workforce in their original occupation where that is humanly possible, and time to get back into the earning stakes that they were in previously. That is also offended against by this legislation. There will not be any consideration of previous earnings, under this bill. It will not matter what workers earned before their injury; it will matter only that they can do 30 hours\u2019 worth of something, which may not be remotely connected to or anywhere near as well paying as the job they had before their injury. And that is meant to be satisfactory for New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis is appalling legislation. It is founded on a misunderstanding\u2014that is the most complimentary way that I can think of saying it\u2014of every single one of the principles in the Woodhouse report, which gave us a first-class and a world-class worker compensation system. This legislation is destroying something that is profoundly precious to New Zealanders. My colleagues will take up some of the individual points in a moment, but it is clear that not one single principle of the accident compensation system in the Woodhouse report is not broken, damaged, or offended against by this legislation. It is a travesty. I feel sorry for the officials who have had to front up and try to prepare something along the lines of the Minister of ACC\u2019s wishes. They cannot have their hearts in it, because most of those I know are committed to the accident compensation system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u0022921560eaa9e24dae9752a5b610ea3ce2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022921560eaa9e24dae9752a5b610ea3ce2\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I will follow on from that speech from Maryan Street by thanking the officials for their hard work on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill. It is a large bill, and they did their work on it in a very timely manner, so I thank them very much for their work. I also thank all the submitters throughout New Zealand who took an active interest in the bill. Many submitters related their personal circumstances to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, but many also represented points of view in relation to accident compensation and what they see as the fundamental concept behind the scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EFollowing on from the previous speech, in which the member talked about the Woodhouse principles, I think it is important to remember that some of the changes made in this bill relate to things that have occurred subsequent to the adoption of the Woodhouse principles on which the accident compensation system was set up. It is not right for members opposite to say the bill is against the Woodhouse principles, because many of the recommendations in this bill relate to things that have been done subsequent to the Woodhouse principles being invoked in the original legislation. I think that members and people out in the community who are listening to this debate need to be aware that the Woodhouse principles are firm, and that the accident compensation scheme is here to stay. In this bill we are making sure that the scheme can survive and be there in the future, to deliver on the Woodhouse principles and to deliver what people expect from it. That is the nature of being in Government at the moment. The Government has to deal with some issues. We have to deal with the financial circumstances that the scheme is in and provide a platform for it to go forward, so that it can deliver the kind of comprehensive care that people expect in order to get back into the workforce. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EThe measures contained in this legislation are not mind-boggling in the sense that they change the fundamental approach to accident compensation or worker compensation in New Zealand. In fact, many of the things in the legislation relate to something that most political parties are in alignment on\u2014that is, the extension of the full funding date. Most political parties, in the select committee, were very supportive of doing that. Only one party, the Green Party, was not supportive of it. Those members see the situation in a different light from the other parties. But the Labour Party is very supportive of extending the full funding date; it is that party\u2019s policy to extend it. Those members want to extend it as much as the National members do, but they will not vote for it. It is something that they want to do, but they will not vote for it. It is very disappointing to see the Labour members not voting for something that they believe in, but I ask what one would expect other than that at this stage of the legislation. Those members are denying support for this legislation on the basis of what is in vogue. They are doing so because they think the appropriate way forward is to put up a fight, but we actually need to look at what the best thing is for the accident compensation scheme, and I say this legislation delivers the changes that are best for the scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EI will now look at some of the changes that have occurred. Changes have been made with regard to casual workers, part-time workers, and non-earners, and to do with the abatement of holiday pay. There are some changes to vocational rehabilitation. Changes have been made to the eligibility threshold for hearing loss, and to the provisions to do with wilfully self-inflicted injury and suicide. There has been a strengthening of the disentitlement provisions for criminals. The bill allows some safety incentives for employers and vehicles. There are also changes to the financial reporting provisions. All those provisions deal with trying to provide a stronger accident compensation system going forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EWhen I look at some of the changes, such as reversing the entitlements for wilfully self-inflicted injury or suicide, or strengthening the disentitlement provisions for criminals, I find it amazing that Labour members come into this Chamber and want to strengthen the entitlements for criminals. Those members want to see criminals get a better result than other New Zealanders do. They want to see criminals be supported and the accident compensation system go down the tubes, which would hurt ordinary New Zealanders who do not have criminal convictions or a criminal record. When we look at the provisions on allowing safety incentives for employers and vehicles, we see that they will lead to a stronger accident compensation system. We are setting up a situation where we can take into account workplace history.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022 data-id=\u00221c9cc9e2c5294628be8fc97969fe6a0e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c9cc9e2c5294628be8fc97969fe6a0e\u0022\u003EKEVIN HAGUE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to begin by sharing the thanks that David Bennett has just expressed to submitters and officials. I thought David Bennett was a very fair chair of the committee, and I appreciated his performance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe Minister has raised the matter of the initial bargain that New Zealanders struck in creating accident compensation: the social contract. I refer to the submission of the ACC Futures Coalition about that social contract: \u201CThe significance of the social contract cannot be overstated. In giving up the right to sue for covered injuries, the public necessarily gave up all the Court-ordered remedies which flow from civil suits. These included: complete compensation for lost earnings (both past and future), compensation for pain, suffering and loss of amenity, compensation for loss of congenial employment, compensation for handicap in the labour market, compensation for loss of pension, as well as compensation for the cost of treatment and/or rehabilitation.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe Government is now seeking to renegotiate unilaterally the terms of that social contract. The Government cannot, simply by expressing a commitment to the Woodhouse principles, pretend that this bill is upholding those principles. I want to work through them in a couple of speeches, beginning with the community responsibility principle. Over the years Governments have moved towards a model for accident compensation that did not resemble the original form for accident compensation but instead resembled a private insurance model. This bill takes accident compensation further in that direction. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe bill provides for new regulatory powers to introduce experience rating and risk sharing into the accident compensation scheme. This will facilitate the introduction of no-claim bonuses, higher or lower levies for individual employers based on injury record, and risk rating for motor vehicles and owners of motor vehicles. It sounds like insurance to me. As Sir Owen Woodhouse pointed out, provisions such as these run counter to the community responsibility principle and have no place in the no-fault scheme that accident compensation is meant to be. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe community responsibility principle recognises that the various activities we undertake in society are interrelated, and that benefit and harm flow on to others. The community responsibility principle recognises, for example, that even though a disproportionately high number of motor vehicle injuries involve motorcyclists, a significant proportion of those injuries are caused by someone other than the motorcyclist. The community responsibility principle also recognises that increased use of motorcycles, where practicable, has environmental benefits if single occupant car usage is consequently reduced, as the greenhouse gas emissions generated by motorcycles are significantly less than from cars. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EExperience rating and risk rating run counter to this principle. The experience rating of employers was found to have negative impacts when it operated in the 1990s. In particular, it had a negative financial impact on the accident compensation scheme. More funds were paid out in levy rebates resulting from positive experience ratings than were received in loadings on levies due to negative experience ratings. It seems particularly bizarre that when the Government is attempting to paint a picture of financial strife in the scheme, it proposes to introduce a policy that will have a negative impact on its financial performance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe formula for experience rating changed each year in an attempt to address the above problem, resulting in year-to-year uncertainty for employers. Experience rating placed pressure on Accident Compensation Corporation staff to remove costs by moving claims from the work account to other accounts, and increased the likelihood of employers contesting whether an injury was a work injury, with the resultant uncertainty and delays in cover and rehabilitation for the injured person. The Accident Compensation Corporation was required to spend significantly more time and money in defending cost allocation through the dispute resolution process, rather than focusing on the rehabilitation of claimants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EI come now to the principle of comprehensive entitlement. Maryan Street has already spoken a little about the issue of the removal of cover for hearing loss. The removal of the right to be covered by accident compensation for people who suffer a hearing loss of less than 6 percent erodes one of the core Woodhouse principles upon which the scheme was founded\u2014that of comprehensive cover. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EHearing loss has only ever been covered by the scheme if it has been caused by an accident, by the work environment of an employee, or by medical treatment. A claimant does not get accident compensation cover if it is caused by a natural process or by disease or infection. But even if hearing loss is caused by an accident or by the work environment, this bill will deny accident cover to someone who is only a little bit deaf due to that cause. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe Transport and Industrial Relations Committee heard from very many submitters who said that a 6 percent hearing loss is very much more than just being a little bit deaf. So claimants with low-level hearing loss caused by industrial deafness will have to meet the cost of hearing aids and any other costs arising from it themselves, even if their overall hearing loss attributable to all causes is significant. This is like denying people cover if they have only small fractures or only minor ligament damage. Given the stocktake now under way, this has the potential to be the thin end of the wedge for removing cover for injuries that are considered minor. In going down this path, what is next? Who is next? Will a person be denied cover if he or she has only a small fracture? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe disentitlement provisions of this bill also erode the principle of comprehensive entitlement. The Minister has made much of the disentitlement provisions in relation to criminals. I made the point at the select committee, and I make it again now, that the disentitlement for this category of persons amounts to a double penalty. A person who commits a crime is punished for his or her crime. The punishment is proportional to the crime the person commits. By denying people cover from injury rehabilitation and compensation, that person is effectively punished a second time, but punished in a way that is disproportionate to the crime they have committed, whereas the \u201Crepugnant to justice\u201D provision in the existing law actually deals with that perfectly adequately. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EI want to talk about the disentitlement resulting from intentional self-harm or suicide, because at the very core of accident compensation is the principle of no fault. The punishment that this bill seeks to impose on the families and dependents of those who have harmed themselves at their own hand is a fundamental breach of that no-fault principle. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EI come now to the principle of complete rehabilitation. I agree with the ACC Futures Coalition that the existing vocational independence provisions are already a breach of the Woodhouse principle, but the provisions in this bill take that breach further and rip it further apart. The bill removes the requirement that the vocational assessment of suitable work takes into account a claimant\u2019s earnings before his or her incapacity, and we have already heard about that in this debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EA claimant who is earning, say, $1,500 a week before his or her injury will have that weekly compensation stopped if he or she is found to do be able to do some job for 30 hours a week that pays only the minimum wage. This runs counter to the purpose of the Act, which is to rehabilitate injured claimants to the greatest extent possible. It is an exercise in cost transfer. It transfers the cost of rehabilitation from the State\u2014from the Accident Compensation Corporation\u2014on to Work and Income, to the injured people themselves, and to their families. So that is a fundamental breach of yet another Woodhouse principle. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EI come now to the Woodhouse principle of real compensation, and, in particular, to the provisions of the bill in relation to holiday pay and the erosion of cover in the bill for seasonal and casual workers. The bill will result in holiday pay paid on the termination of employment being treated as earnings for the purpose of abating weekly compensation. This proposal is both unfair and an erosion of workers\u2019 rights. Holiday pay accrues in respect of time when a worker, subsequently injured, has not yet sustained an injury.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u002262b637a207ac4ea9bcd88f026fa9acec\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002262b637a207ac4ea9bcd88f026fa9acec\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I want to respond to a couple of points about the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill raised by the Green MP Kevin Hague, when he talked about a fundamental attack on the Woodhouse principles. Let me firstly deal with the awful and tragic issue of suicide, where he said the bill breached the Woodhouse report. The opposite of that is true; it is absolutely the opposite of that. The Woodhouse report dealt with the sensitive issue of self-harm and suicide. Owen Woodhouse concluded that it was not right that an accident compensation scheme provide cover for that situation. That cover was only included as an add-on to the scheme during the term of the previous Government. It was only an add-on put in place by the previous Government; it was not recommended in the Woodhouse report. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe simple question I have for Mr Hague is this. If a family loses a loved one from heart disease or from cancer, what is the entitlement of the family who is bereaved? The answer is that they are eligible for support from Work and Income. So the real question I have for Mr Hague and the Labour members is why people who take their own life should have their families treated more generously than the families of those who tragically die from heart disease, cancer, and many other ailments. That is the real question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e3f00bc281846db879fad6bb577df72\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: Does the member understand about blame and family blame? That\u2019s so sad.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a155bf02e3a642edb332efe6cd5790ff\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The second challenge I would give to the member who is chipping in is this: why, when Labour extended the scheme to include suicide and self-harm, did it not fund that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f09d9866f6e48a3891b9be1c9ca3fbc\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: For goodness\u2019 sake.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0c5176d24f447d88588c4c3832c14b0\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The member says \u201CFor goodness\u2019 sake.\u201D If the Labour members want to extend schemes like the accident compensation scheme, someone has to pay for it, and we should be honest and upfront about that. It is dishonest for Labour members to argue in this Chamber that we can have those extensions to the scheme, but that nobody has to pay for it. That is not true. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe next question I want to deal with is the issue of the limits in respect of the questions\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227120d35a464c4a9cb7decef85bab2ddd\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: ACC earned $1 billion more than it paid out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b6a4b2b39dc42bab6b25ca5c8c550b3\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: That is Maryan Street again. Let me show members where she is being quite dishonest. She signed the accounts for the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) in June\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3d5c7cd08a74ea78e191fe7ca702c72\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: It was in the annual report that that Minister signed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f23dcc472d148d9af9c809e42397f86\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. Maryan Street signed a set of accounts that showed a $2.4 billion loss when she was the Minister. That was based on a model of full funding, not the cash-in, cash-out model that she is trying to drag us into now. She said, when she was the Minister, that the proper accounting rules for ACC were for full funding. I acknowledge that the Green members are quite upfront and honest about the fact that they do not support full funding; they want \u201Cpay as you go\u201D. That is fair enough. I do not agree with them, but at least they are consistent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI have a simple question for Labour members. Labour members are saying that when they were in Government, they supported full funding. In fact, they actually extended full funding to other accounts. But when we get into the debate on this bill, they suddenly want to change their tune and use the numbers on a \u201Cpay as you go\u201D basis. So I have a simple challenge for Labour members: are they in favour of full funding or \u201Cpay as you go\u201D? Is Labour in favour of \u201Cpay as you go\u201D or full funding? We are in favour of full funding, the Green Party members said they are in favour of \u201Cpay as you go\u201D, but what is Labour\u2019s position? Here is a fundamental policy issue about accident compensation. The spokesperson on accident compensation, David Parker, says Labour is in favour of full funding, and Maryan Street, who was in favour of full funding when she was the Minister, does not know what she favours. Members can only conclude that Labour members have no idea what they stand for in respect of accident compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThen we come to a further issue, around holiday pay. The Green member argued, and Labour members have also argued, that people should somehow be able to receive accident compensation and their holiday pay entitlements at the same time. For goodness\u2019 sake, in building our welfare State and social provisions such as holiday pay, accident compensation, and benefits, whenever did we say that people should be better off when they are off work after an accident than when they were working? That is what that means. The Labour and Green members are arguing that people should be better off after an accident than they were when they were working. That is not sensible; that is not sound. They say people have earned their holiday pay. Of course they have, but nobody is denying them the right to their holiday pay. We are simply saying they cannot receive holiday pay and accident compensation at the same time if they are not returning to work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003ELet us be very clear what the provisions of this bill do. If people are off work temporarily\u2014let us say they are off work for a month\u2014this bill makes it absolutely plain that they keep their holiday entitlements. They do not have to use them as a substitute for accident compensation. But if people are to receive accident compensation permanently, they cannot get both. I think that is fair. Members are saying we can have these double add-ons because they are totally unbalanced in their view of the levy payers who actually have to pay for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EWhat was most extraordinary from the Green member was the argument that crims should get accident compensation income lump sums, because otherwise\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294c807b390de4990829f885165c530c3\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0fe538b9f074dafbcce9fab819ca19d\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: This is very interesting. The Labour members are arguing that crims should be able to get compensation. The most interesting part in the minority report is this: \u201CLabour members agree that \u2026 an offender like Graeme Burton should not receive lump-sum or earning-related compensation.\u201D But who was in Government when Graeme Burton committed the awful tragedy against Karl Kuchenbecker? Who was the Minister? It was Maryan Street. Did ACC apply to the court to have him disentitled? No. Well, who is to blame? It is Maryan Street.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b332b5946bab48e992f609d34ecc103e\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: Why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c1026fd54744ebb95b70df9a5ed233c\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: That is a good question. Who was the Minister at the time? It was Maryan Street. You know, during Maryan Street\u2019s time as Minister there was not a single occasion when there was disentitlement for any criminal. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI am looking forward, as all members of the Government are, to getting out on the traps to argue that a vote for Labour is a vote for accident compensation for crims, and a vote for National is a vote for a party that takes a more balanced and reasonable perspective than that. We say that whether or not people commit a crime, they should get medical care. But I find it offensive that a person who has committed a criminal act then gets a lump-sum accident compensation payment, and that is why we are making that change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe last point I want to note is in respect of the issue of hearing loss. Both the Labour and Green members effectively say we can have a limitless scheme. They argue against levy increases, but say we can have a scheme that goes for ever. I went along to my local audiologist and had a test, because I wanted to have a feel for these provisions. I did a lot of tractor work in my student days, and I was advised by my audiologist that I have a hearing loss of about 1.9 percent, which is within the frequency that is work-related. Those members say I should be able to claim accident compensation for that, because they believe in a limitless scheme. National members say that is not possible. When we look at the huge increase in cost associated with hearing aids, it is our view that there need to be some sensible limits. Australia has a minimum hearing loss limit of 5 percent in some states, and of 6 percent in others. The UK, other developed countries such as Canada, the US\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296631d563bc24ddca124494ffb27e8a6\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s heartless.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022422b9e2923884d2c8ccebd604a953878\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The member says it is heartless. I just think that is left-wing mumbo-jumbo from a member who is disengaged from the real issues of cost in respect of accident compensation and the fact that someone has to pay for it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe simple question is whether the Labour members believe that I should be able to get an accident compensation scheme - funded hearing aid? We say no to that on this side of the Chamber. My hearing loss is not bad enough, at only 1.9 percent, to need a hearing aid, but if the hearing lost is over 6 percent, then people do. The members opposite do not want to acknowledge that accident compensation cannot be limitless. They want to promise everybody every little entitlement out there and somehow pretend that someone does not have to pay for it. That is not the case, and that is why members opposite are incorrect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u0022a25137dcc1e946529b368dd1ea11a005\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a25137dcc1e946529b368dd1ea11a005\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am happy to stand and take a call in response to some of the comments of the Minister in the chair, the Hon Dr Nick Smith. He said in his first call on the Committee stage of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill that he really wanted to have a proper debate about this legislation. I say to the Minister for ACC that if he is genuine about that, then he should stop misrepresenting what Labour members have said and believe, and he should stop misrepresenting the information that the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee was given. If he is genuine about having a proper debate about accident compensation, then he needs to tone down his hyperbole and his rhetoric. I say to that Minister that if the only way he can make his arguments is by misrepresentation and exaggeration, then he has to seriously question how strong his arguments are. That is all I have heard from that Minister, and it is disappointing. It is very disappointing, because this bill is immense in its impact on New Zealanders and on their families.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI find it incredibly offensive when David Bennett and the Minister in the chair get to their feet and say that Labour likes criminals, that it thinks that criminals should get a free ride, and that it thinks that criminals should have all their accident compensation paid for. The Minister knows that that is not true. In fact, he read out the part of Labour\u2019s minority view, attached to the bill, in which we said we do not believe that Graeme Burton should have received that funding, that there is a problem, and that it is up to the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) to take action if it believes that that is appropriate. It is not up to the Minister, and the Minister knows that. He accused Maryan Street of not stopping that happening, when he knows full well that she did not have the power to do that when she was the Minister for ACC. Again, I say to the Hon Nick Smith that if he has to misrepresent the law to that extent, then that throws into doubt his credibility and his arguments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EACC has the power to disentitle people now\u2014it does. And if there are reasons why the corporation is not doing that, then the Minister should find out what those reasons are. As the corporation has said, sometimes it does not know whether those people have been convicted. It does not know if they have been found guilty. It assumes they are innocent until proven guilty. If there is a problem with information sharing, then the Minister should address that, and Labour members have said they would support his action. But the Minister should not introduce\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a05ce4cd896742aaa0c5ae5362e4eb18\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s in the bill. No, you\u2019re opposing it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221636719519b04266b131cc14ea3ab73e\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: I tell the Minister we are opposing everything else in this Draconian legislation, but I say there is no need to go that far. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe Minister talks about Graeme Burton. I want to take the debate back down to the other end of the scale, and ask the Minister about people who face large fines and reparation. Under the Minister\u2019s legislation, wealthy people, who can pay those, do not lose their entitlements. But they have done the same thing as poor people who cannot pay, and who have had to go to prison. Wealthy people who can pay their way out of that are not disentitled, but poor people, who have had to go to prison because they do not have the money to just pay the fine or reparation, are disentitled. I ask the Minister how that is fair. How is it fair that someone who can pay that is not disentitled, and someone who cannot pay it is, for exactly the same offence? Let us be clear: when we are talking about this, we are not only talking about the Graeme Burtons of the world. Most people agree that it would have been an appropriate action to have him disentitled for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EBut we are talking about someone who is driving home from work after working three shifts, who is really, really tired so should not be driving, and who causes an accident that harms someone else, and harms himself or herself in the process. That person would be disentitled, and his or her family would be disentitled. But someone who does a stupid manoeuvre on the road and overtakes unsafely\u2014[Interruption]\u2014they would be disentitled, I say to the Minister. Under his law, they would be. But people overtake unsafely, they speed, and they cause an accident. It is wrong, it is bad, and they should not do it, but those are also the people we are talking about. We are not just\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a9ba13179c749c5ac2c80c1fe17a35e\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not true.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c875a4ca43d6470b9c8a62c4ef72a611\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: You see, this is what worries me\u2014what I am saying is absolutely true, but the Minister is just shaking his head and saying that it is not true. What concerns me about the approach of this Minister\u2014and he knows what he is talking about\u2014is that this is not someone who is not intelligent. This is an intelligent Minister, who knows that what I am saying is right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c0efec5801e4c0b9a8d1ff378046800\u0022\u003EDr Ashraf Choudhary\u003C/span\u003E: Really?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5a14088302143cf9b340ecb393d588e\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes; he is intelligent. But\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a42c8d044ad403bb4e965dd3d8485aa\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: Makes a change for ACC.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbf4c43643854301849b360ce74aa3d1\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Right. Well, Mr Woodhouse has decided that what I am saying is not appropriate enough or relevant enough for him to take seriously. He has just said that David Parker and Maryan Street are not intelligent. I thank Mr Woodhouse for his contribution to the debate\u2014stellar, as usual! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI am trying to say that this Minister knows that what I am saying is true. Under his legislation such people would be disentitled, because their offence can result in a sentence of 2 years or more. They would be disentitled; their families would be disentitled. We will point out the section to the Minister where that clause is. So if a worker causes an accident and harms someone when driving home when really tired because that person works three jobs and should not be driving, then he or she is disentitled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u002255faa71f9c7848aebc16623fddfdb019\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002255faa71f9c7848aebc16623fddfdb019\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am very happy to take a call on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill during what will be a pretty long evening, I think. I will start firstly by acknowledging the honourable member Kevin Hague for his contribution to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, as well as to the debate in the Committee of the whole House today. He is not a permanent member of the committee, but he made a very considered contribution. I strongly disagree with many of the principles that underpin his view, but I certainly acknowledge the clarity of his position. I also acknowledge the officials. I do not feel sorry for them; I do not think they need anyone to feel sorry for them. They are a very intelligent bunch. They discharged their duties well, dispassionately, and in accordance with the policy framework that the Government set them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI come back to the member Mr Hague\u2019s questions about breaches of the Woodhouse principles as set out in the royal commission report. He mentioned community responsibility as an example of a breach by the Government in this bill, and he used the example of experience rating. I suggest to the member that we already have experience rating. It is in the form of industry classifications. It is not a question of whether that is a form of experience rating; it is a question of degrees. We accept the principle of community responsibility. Everybody pays. The member Ms Street talked about the example of the motorcyclist who had been prepared to pay a levy. It is insurance 101. It is accident compensation 101, even if one does not want to call it an insurance scheme. However, I think that even Mr Hague would reject the notion that workers in the forestry industry, the fishing industry, and the other very high-risk industries should pay the same premiums as office workers or casual cleaners. That is a form of experience rating. What I am trying to point out is that we can have community responsibility, but we are talking about degrees. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI think the member Lynne Pillay\u2019s interjection on the Minister in the chair, the Hon Dr Nick Smith, summed up the attitude of the members on the other side of the Chamber. She said that Labour\u2019s changes that moved away from the Woodhouse report principles were improvements, but that the Government\u2019s changes were somehow breaches of the report. I think that sums up the attitude of the Opposition on this matter. It is not rational. The finance-change deniers continue to think that we can have a scheme without constraint, and that simply is not possible. They think that we can continue to have cost increases five times the rate of inflation, and expect there to be no consequences. The levy payers, the insured, and the people who are claiming have a right to clarity about what they can expect and how much they can pay. The member Mr Parker goes on and on about comparisons with Australia. Those comparisons cannot be made; they are different schemes. I suggest that, if this is such a fantastic scheme, if the principles that underpin this scheme are so sacred, why, in 42 years, has not a single Western jurisdiction followed them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c034aa25a5c340b18729166716711d2f\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Doesn\u2019t the member support the scheme?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c83329425ad4ff99bb8f1485b98d467\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely, but what I am saying is, members should not deify it, say that it cannot be changed, and suggest that it is world leading, when not a single Western jurisdiction has followed it. In relation to levy increases, there is an idea that somehow, because Australia\u2019s levy rates are a bit higher than ours, that that is OK, we can continue to lump cost increase on top of cost increase on employers and expect them to pay. Well, that is simply not the way business works, but I would not expect members on the other side of the Chamber to understand that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI will move into an area, though, where I think we did agree. The Minister is not sure and I am not sure, but I think it is still Labour policy that full funding continue. The Greens have been very clear in their principled stand against full funding, and I think the committee respected that. They would like the scheme to go back to a \u201Cpay as you go\u201D basis. That must be incredibly awkward for Labour, because their members say they support the concept of full funding, but just about every single union came to the select committee and said that they did not. The Service and Food Workers Union, the Council of Trade Unions, the Maritime Union, the Rail and Maritime Transport Union, the New Zealand Nurses Organisation, the New Zealand Educational Institute, the Public Service Association, and FinSec all said they did not want full funding. But here is the thing: in response to questions about when they had previously articulated that view, they could not say. Did they oppose it in 1998, when full funding was first proposed? No. Did they oppose it in 2001, when Labour made amendments to the bill? No. Did they oppose it in 2008? No. Not a single representative of the unions had previously said that they did not support full funding. Why would they? Full funding was working. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI want to segue back to the second reading, when the member Ms Street said in her call: \u201CThey were meant to be fully funded by 2014, and the National Government at the time\u201D\u2014that is, 1998\u2014\u201Cpicked the period of 15 years out of the hat. The number was arbitrary. It could have been 10 years, it could have been 20 years, but National said that it would split the difference and make it 15 years.\u201D That is nonsense. I worked for the corporation at that time; I know the people who made those calculations. The calculations were very, very soundly based, they were scientific, and they were intended not to impose an undue burden on employers and other levy payers while we moved towards full funding. Guess what? The scheme was working. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI have shown the graph I have here to members in the Chamber; I want to show it again because it is really important. This shows the path that the scheme, from 1999 to 2014, would have taken to get to the point when 100 percent of the assets matched the liabilities. Not only were we on track until about 5 years ago, but we were actually ahead of the game. The red line shows the actual proportion of assets to liabilities against where we would have needed to get to, to get to 100 percent by 2014. We were ahead of the game. But it is pretty easy to see where the downturn came in. Was the downturn in 2009, when we had the largest recession in 80 years? No. Was it in 2008, when we had the wobbles and went into what Mr Cullen called a technical recession? Was it in 2007, when things were not great but also not bad? Actually, the downturn, when we were at 70 percent and then tanked, was in 2006. It was at a time when the rates of return on the corporation\u2019s investments, and on the sharemarket generally, were at a really, really good rate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003ESo let us not pretend that being thrown off the path to full funding in 2014 has anything to do with investment returns. Yes, we had had problems with investment returns, but in my view it had everything to do with sloppy management and oversight at a policy level, which allowed the corporation to take its eye off the rehabilitation ball, and the finance-change deniers on the other side of the Chamber to think there did not need to be any fiscal constraints\u2014the come-one, come-all policy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI wonder what those 42,000 people who were callously thrown off district health board waiting lists thought they would do to get their surgery and their hearing aids. Well, I know what they did. They went back to their general practitioners, faced with absolutely impossible odds. They had a craps-shoot with the corporation, and some of them won. Why did they win? Private insurers said that the corporation had to give a \u201Cdecline\u201D letter before the private insurer would pay for their surgery. What happened? Surgeons would put the application to the corporation, and the corporation would accept it. Why? That was the culture that was set up. But there needs to be more fiscal constraint, and I think the Opposition supports the move to extend full funding. I know that Opposition members do not agree with why, and that they will still come up with that trumped-up privatisation agenda that I know the Minister will refute soundly in this Committee stage. But I would still like a member for Labour, from the other side of the Chamber, to take a call and say \u201CWe support full funding and here\u2019s why.\u201D, because I do not think we have any notion of whether they do or do not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u002226b1ecca727146f293ee532e46c25032\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002226b1ecca727146f293ee532e46c25032\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have news for that member: unions and the Labour Party sometimes disagree. We do not always agree on everything, just as I hope that Business New Zealand and the National Party do not always agree on everything. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022582cfc54ba7141fd94cf8c5bf4792044\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Business Roundtable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c33cb9508374e55b2906fb56d494e90\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Or the Business Roundtable\u2014who knows? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI will talk a little bit about Part 1, but I want to explore the issue of privatisation, given that the member has raised it. I look forward to the responses of the Minister in the chair, the Hon Dr Nick Smith, to my comments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EPart 1 contains some pretty miserable provisions\u2014the so-called cost containments\u2014despite the fact that just about all the Government departments advised the Minister, and the select committee, actually, that these provisions would primarily affect low-income M\u0101ori, Pasifika, and other workers, and the vulnerable, and would shift costs to health and welfare, and to the injured workers themselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EPart 1 creates the platform for returning to the past\u2014or back to the future\u2014and for the privatisation of the scheme. The Government says that the bill is about cost containment and saving our accident compensation scheme, but we know that the changes in this bill are a prelude to privatisation, which National has admitted it is working on; it is part of the deal with the ACT Party. National wants to reduce the accident compensation costs in order to make the scheme attractive to private insurers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EMerrill Lynch (Australia) says that privatisation of the work account means $2 billion in revenue for Australian insurers, with a profit of $200 million a year. New Zealanders will pay for that. New Zealanders are already paying more and getting less, and that situation will only get worse. So Labour opposes this legislation, and I will go into why. First of all, I say that the scheme is not broke\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d14127d170394289b5e283e17dcf780f\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. We are dealing with Part 1. There is no clause anywhere in this bill that has provisions for competition or privatisation. The member says she will go into great detail about it, but it is not one of the provisions in the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274abb412eb114c868d8f84c72c55b8ff\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I ask the member to concentrate on Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022418f0d0f64a64741b1521eb96691b3da\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbf3b73e1e594808b16524bc556e811c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I have ruled. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022319049a93cd649e486f7006f1984bb12\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: I do want to recall what happened the last time National played with accident compensation. National has been in Government before, and it created a nightmare for workers in the past. I see Part 1 as a repeat of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279124cd93d494d2482e6d3f2ad66f44d\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: Going back\u2014back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223943c62b5de64890b10ad53f72aa24e3\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is true. The language of the Government is about providing choice. We have heard from the Government in this debate that this bill is about providing choice for people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dadbab49bc9f410ea9689343321b7245\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: God forbid that we provide choice!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229cbc8e34582b44b19178c6cd3abda353\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. The last time National had the reins of power it used exactly the same language, but the only choice we are talking about here, really, is choice for employers\u2014to choose between insurers competing for business. There was no choice for injured workers. So what happened? Well, it was inevitable. We saw what happened the last time the National Government had a go at privatisation. Privatisation is on this Government\u2019s agenda. It is not in the bill, but the bill creates a platform, through the arguments about funding and about cost containment, for making the scheme much more attractive to private insurers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThere are several things in this bill that we will talk about as we go through Part 1, and I am happy to address them. But I make the comment that others have expanded their comments way beyond Part 1, so I am a bit disappointed that I cannot do that. The provisions in Part 1 that Labour members will be addressing are things like the lack of focus on the importance of accident prevention. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe fact that the Government is now proposing to change the bill\u2019s name from the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill to the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill says that this is not about injury prevention; it is about accidents. We are getting something that is all about accidents. There is nothing in the bill about injury prevention. The previous Labour Government was very big on injury prevention, but now we are seeing cuts to health and safety training, and provisions\u2014cuts here and cuts there\u2014that are cutting back injury prevention. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe other things we will talk more about in Part 1 are the changes to vocational independence. I am really looking forward to exploring why the Minister does not understand that 35 hours of paid work a week is not the same as 30 hours of paid work a week. It is 5 hours a week less. That is a problem for people\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd10b850766f418c81232c852fbdf0cc\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s what they wanted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ebd281d7c7f4d30ae1cd483e4e4366c\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that is true, but that is a real problem for people who are trying to get back into the workforce, and who are trying to make ends meet. We will also talk about the cover for work-related gradual process injuries. That is also an issue, as changes to the three-part test are blatantly unfair. We will also talk about holiday pay; I am looking forward to debating that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00225f4ab8f3648844228b23af34c02ea85e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225f4ab8f3648844228b23af34c02ea85e\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I challenge the previous speaker, Darien Fenton, over the proposed change of the name for the Act. Opposition members are very offended that the Supplementary Order Paper I have tabled states that we should call the legislation, when passed, the Accident Compensation Act. Actually that was the name of the Act from 1974 until 2001. Are they saying\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c34bb17b3112445091c726d56b57026d\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Back to the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022927d3401512946bbb8b7f476c176c0b8\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am simply saying that we should call it what it is. Darien Fenton is concerned to point out that the legislation is about injury prevention, but let me tell members the record: in the time during which the name of the Act was changed to the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act, the number of injuries was 1.34 million. In the 8 years that the Act has been called the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act the number of injuries has actually gone up by 300,000. So my question for the member is whether by changing the name of the Act and calling it the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act, we have prevented any injuries. The record is awful. If I look through the 1990s, I see that in the last 5 years when the Act was still called the Accident Compensation Act\u2014which I think most New Zealanders would call it\u2014the rate of injury increase was a whole lot less. So that shows that changing the name of an Act actually does not change much, at all. It is an exercise in politically correct nonsense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbb496f734994ddb968dd38e10dfbf6a\u0022\u003EKelvin Davis\u003C/span\u003E: Then why change it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1cb1151839149f2b24f5f39a842c2d4\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Let me tell the member exactly why we should change it. If the average New Zealander out there wanted to know what his or her rights were under the accident compensation scheme, and looked up the Act on the web, what would the person look for? I would look for the Accident Compensation Act, but how many people would know that the Act is called the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act? I say that very, very few would. So in answer to the member, I ask: why not call it what it is? Why do we have an Act that is principally about accidents but that does not mention the word \u201Caccident\u201D? Why is the word not\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a88fcda1287d48238467d86644c7761b\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: It won\u2019t change anything.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3f96db9fe8249b9aecbc6837d7a31fd\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, this is simply about rejecting the politically correct nonsense that drove the previous Labour Government for 9 years, when it believed that if it changed the name of the Act, suddenly that would fix things. The truth is that over the last 9 years when Labour was in Government, rehabilitation rates got worse every single year. When Labour changed the name of the Act, injury prevention failed, and the number of injuries increased in each and every year. This Government is a pragmatic and common-sense Government that says we should call the Act what most New Zealanders would look for\u2014that is, the Accident Compensation Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u0022b980914b4f9b4e89baf9a0725401ff1f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b980914b4f9b4e89baf9a0725401ff1f\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to take the Minister in the chair, the Hon Dr Nick Smith, to task with his misrepresentation of Labour\u2019s position in respect of criminals. This is really populist policy on the part of National: \u201CLet\u2019s kick the criminals, again; let\u2019s make it look like Labour\u2019s in favour of criminals, and unfair compensation to criminals.\u201D The first point is this example that is given with Graeme Burton. What a load of rubbish! Under the existing law the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) could have applied to disentitle Graeme Burton from any lump-sum compensation or earnings-related compensation. That is absolutely clear, I tell Dr Smith. The existing legislation provides for that. I do claim some expertise in this: I am a lawyer. ACC told us that ever since this provision has been in there, to the extent that it can go back in its records, it has only ever applied to the court in 12 cases. In nine of those cases the court agreed and said the person should be disentitled. In three of those cases the court said: \u201CNo, that\u2019s wrong. It\u2019s too tough. You\u2019ve had your criminal penalty.\u201D I would almost guarantee that if Graeme Burton had any earnings-related compensation or lump-sum compensation, and ACC had applied to the court and said that he should be disentitled, then the court would have made a wise decision and it would have disentitled him. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EBut then, really, the Minister went even further than that and complained that Graeme Burton had been given a prosthesis, as he had lost his leg. Now, this is where I disagree with National. What a miserable, inhumane society he stands for if National stands for people like Graeme Burton walking around on crutches. Although Graeme Burton is a bad person, National would have him eventually re-enter society with a stump and no false leg. Does the Minister really want to live in a country where we not only take away a person\u2019s accident compensation and give the person a serious term of imprisonment\u2014and a person like Graeme Burton may never get out of there\u2014but then we stop him getting a false leg? That is what the Minister stands for, and other members in the National Government stand for that too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI have recently travelled to some Third World countries. One of the most distressing things for me is to see beggars, without legs, on stumps and inadequate crutches. If we as a society stand for not only taking away people\u2019s compensation and giving them a criminal penalty but also have the Minister saying things like: \u201CLook, it\u2019s terrible; he\u2019s had a prosthesis.\u201D, what sort of a country would we be? That is the difference between the National Party and the Labour Party. I tell Dr Smith that that might be popular policy but it is wrong. It is just wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThe existing law is adequate. It is not the fault of the Minister or the previous Minister if ACC sometimes does not apply to disentitle when it should in terms of earnings-related compensation or lump-sum compensation. I agree with that. I also agree that there might be problems with the data that ACC relies upon, and that it ought to have more access to criminal justice records so that it can turn up these cases and make the appropriate application. But this change goes far further than that, and, as Moana Mackey says, it applies to anyone who has any sentence of imprisonment in respect of an imprisonable offence that could have a maximum period of imprisonment of 2 years. It does not have to be someone who is imprisoned for 2 years; the person could be imprisoned for a week. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThat is where her example about how this causes injustice is most apparent. Someone could lead a blameless life all of his or her life, and make a stupid mistake driving home from work and injure someone coming the other way. The person is charged with careless use causing injury or careless use causing death. The maximum penalty for that is more than 2 years\u2019 imprisonment. The person might be a low-income person and might have other fines that have not been paid because he or she cannot afford to pay a fine. The person gets sent to prison for a month, so not only does the person suffer the criminal penalty but he or she loses all accident compensation. That does not affect just that person; it affects the family. Again, that is not the sort of society I want to live in. I am happy to leave that issue to the jurisdiction of the courts to judge what is just. What is being done here is unjust, and just takes the country in a poor direction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u002207869da35c6141bebe56fe922514377c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002207869da35c6141bebe56fe922514377c\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I welcome the opportunity to have the debate about the criminal disentitlement provisions of this bill, because Labour members are effectively arguing that the provisions in the law as they stand are fine and do work. But if that is the case, why has there not been a single case of disentitlement in a decade? Why has there not been a single case? Those members are standing up in this Chamber and saying that the Minister is being disingenuous, the Minister is being dishonest, because there are provisions in the law right now that allow criminals to be disentitled. Well, I simply say to them that that may be so in theory, but members like me on the Government side are actually interested in what happens in practice. The current provisions do not work; the legal threshold is too high. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EWhy do we know that? We know that from case law. If we take the most recent example\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221b5036ffed440b4991076b2f1701025\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Nine out of 12 applications were disentitled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e5bff5400aa47c48225f4de2bb613ad\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: How many were there in the last decade? I tell Mr Parker that what has happened\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d9df7279b04476abd2d0a1dc0ee0bc8\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: How many have been made\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b43666dc9d99489abab25dd614de3882\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I gave Mr Parker the decency of hearing him out, so perhaps he might also do the same for me, if he wants to have this debate. In the most recent case where the corporation did go to court, the case was thrown out and the person received lump-sum compensation. Labour members cannot argue about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe second thing was that Ms Mackey argued that I was saying that anybody who was convicted of an offence with more than 2 years\u2019 imprisonment would automatically be disentitled\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4848c98a7d542c38740e4076cdba765\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0c54f046e8b4fbeb523cb27f4d1788f\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The member says: \u201CThat\u2019s right.\u201D, but she misses out on a key point, and that is where Labour members are not saying what the proposed law says. The provision states that not only do people need to be found guilty of committing an offence with a penalty greater than 2 years, but they need to be sent to prison or have home detention\u2014both those tests.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d75e76ffd98540c8906f6119b31dd94c\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s what I just said.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1ca2dbcc88a447c88230f9c77fa90da\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: That is not what Moana Mackey said. The issue and challenge I have is when members opposite point out minor offences and say that a person will lose his or her entitlement. I challenge those members to go to the practical decisions of the court. Do we really think that the average law-abiding New Zealander\u2014the exact example that Moana Mackey gave was of a person who was overtired, crossed the centre line, and was involved in a serious accident\u2014in a court of law will be sent to prison under our current legal system? Not on your life!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290e32013835b471385a1df18ca7a8842\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Sometimes, yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4b9c3a7032d45b3b4f4c6ffa2b316ed\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: No, that is not true, and Mr Parker knows better than that. The reality is that our judges are under enormous pressure. The reality is that most people who drink and drive do not go to prison on a first offence. It is only when there are multiple offences one after another, and gross irresponsibility, that our judges send people to prison or require them to have home detention. That is where Labour members are being quite disingenuous about these criminal disentitlement provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe last bit they are not mentioning\u2014quite deliberately, I suspect\u2014is that there is also a provision for the Minister, if he or she believes that the disentitlement is unfair, to provide an exemption. The further point that Labour is not acknowledging is that there is no question on the part of members on this side of the Chamber that this is a humane society, and that people should get emergency and other care funded by the accident compensation scheme. What we are saying, and what I make no apologies for saying\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad42775540534481b85b66a47804bd24\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Then why did you mention the prosthesis? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ef04541b2df4fc2a46d92a0a9cea943\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely\u2014Mr Parker wants to raise the Graeme Burton case. I say that Graeme Burton did not get lump-sum compensation, to the best of my knowledge; nor did he get income compensation. The issue there was his prosthesis. I make no apologies for the fact that this bill says that unless a medical practitioner provides that a prosthesis is essential for his day-to-day life, he will not get it. Do I think that New Zealanders welcome the fact that they provided that man with a prosthesis that enabled him to go on and commit a further attempted murder? I have to say, for my part, that I am disgusted that my compensation scheme levies gave that man the mobility to again attempt murder. That is where we do differ. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f2cb2039b1f490cbb18d55063254707\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: It didn\u2019t. That happened after the murder.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7117bf29a034975b4f86ebb0ad32067\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ddf0131e41624f078a41031aa78051db\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: That was after the murder; the prosthesis\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224354b71e88d840db84b92e08e91c8cc9\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. What David Parker is ignoring\u2014and I challenge him to look at it\u2014is the video of Graeme Burton in prison, with that prosthesis, attempting to commit another murder. Mr Parker is arguing that we need to provide Graeme Burton with that mobility so he can continue to consider those sorts of acts of thuggery. I make no apologies for saying no to Graeme Burton in that case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u00223fb4227e92d74af89477bf77b05d8848\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223fb4227e92d74af89477bf77b05d8848\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to start by congratulating the Minister for ACC, because every time he jumps to his feet on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill we see the National Government\u2019s true agenda. I want to take him up on what he said, not in this round but in the round before it. He said the bill is to be renamed with the words \u201Caccident insurance\u201D, because that was what the legislation was called in 1990. It used to be called that. That epitomises the back to the future approach of this Government. We did not used to have a lump-sum payment, so maybe we should go back to that situation, too. We used to have only 3 weeks\u2019 holiday pay, so we should go back to that, too. We did not use to have Working for Families, so let us get rid of that, too. Let us go back to all those things. We did not use to have cheaper doctors\u2019 visits, so let us go back to that, too. We did not use to have workers\u2019 rights in this country under a National Government, so let us go back to that, too. There is no excuse whatsoever for the Minister in the chair to get to his feet and say to members in this Chamber that it is OK to do certain things because that is what used to happen. That is the argument that that Minister is running in this Chamber. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI will talk a little more about dog-whistle politics, which is just typical of that Minister. Again, as has been discussed by my colleagues before me, the issue relates to prisoners\u2019 compensation. Nick Smith said a couple of speeches ago that the Government knows that is not right. I say to this Minister that if he had gone out to the steps of this Parliament last week, he would have heard a lot of Kiwis talking about things that just are not right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e86b5dfe80d64bccad6f2f60c4bae278\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha, ha.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b39d539b05f54d9cab24b5e551e953ec\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: That is right; the Minister can laugh. He sits in the chair and laughs. He laughs at people who use their democratic right to come to this Parliament to tell this Minister that the Government\u2019s lousy bill is an insult, and that the Government\u2019s application of the accident compensation scheme is an insult to workers and New Zealanders\u2014to claimants and New Zealanders. That Minister sits there and laughs, with a big smirk on his face. I tell the Minister that that is an insult to all New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EBut what about the people who rallied outside Parliament? What about the biking community, who said the big hikes in the cost, the lack of support, and the \u201Cpay more, get less\u201D campaign were not right? Why is the Minister not listening to them when he talks about what is not right? What about the survivors of sexual abuse, who have been denied their rights by this Government? What about them? They came and said that was not right. Did the Government listen to them? Does the Minister stand in this Chamber and say that is not right, so we should not do it? No, that Minister does not do that. What about the many, many people who have suffered so much stress and anxiety over waiting for their claims to be heard, to be looked at, under this Government, and who in many instances then find, when the claims are heard, that their claim has been denied and they have to go to review? Does the Minister listen to them saying that is not right? No, the Minister does not do that. What about the submitters who came to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and opposed the bill in droves\u2014those who came to the select committee, and said this bill is not right? Did the Minister listen to them? No, the Minister did not listen to them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I want to call this Minister to task for is his attitude towards suicide. I find that personally to be absolutely offensive\u2014absolutely offensive. When the Minister was speaking, I was saying that things move on and improve. All New Zealanders are incredibly proud of New Zealand\u2019s accident compensation scheme. It is a social contract, and it is something that we all hold dear. But surely as politicians, as activists, and as people in our communities, we want to improve the situation for all New Zealanders. That is what this Parliament is about. Well, that is what those of us who are now in Opposition understand, and certainly what the Green Party understands, Parliament to be about. When caring New Zealanders are very concerned about suicide in this country, when the previous Labour Government invested so much into suicide prevention initiatives\u2014so much into promoting support for people, and into promoting an understanding of mental health issues\u2014what does this Government do? This Government does exactly the opposite of what Labour did. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWhen a family suffers the loss of a loved one through suicide, it is an absolutely devastating occurrence. Let us be really clear that if a family suffers that, this new bill sets it out that in that instance, the surviving spouse or partner of the deceased claimant, any child of the deceased claimant, and any other dependant of a deceased claimant are not entitled to any compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5b2b45da631420b82be6ee3a3912c15\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019ll teach them!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229abe6e9a91394c8e84b7fbc420e08bc3\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: The Government is saying \u201CThat will teach them; that will teach them. This is punitive. How dare they commit suicide?\u201D. What I find even more offensive is that I was looking at an article entitled \u201CSuicide danger in ACC delay: expert.\u201D Here is the irony: we have a Government whose accident compensation policy is making experts become very concerned that claimants will consider committing suicide, and the Government is saying \u201COh yes, but if people do that, there will be nothing to assist their families.\u201D I will tell members something: we hear some pretty reprehensible stuff from the Government side of the Chamber, but I think that this one absolutely caps it all. I think that this one caps it all. I would urge the Minister to stand up and try to explain again to the Committee why he thinks that measure is acceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI also want to talk very briefly about independent accident compensation reports referring to \u201Cdraining the swamp\u201D in cutting back services. Under the National Government, reports are saying accident compensation has gone too far towards having a customer focus and the Government needs to begin tightening the gateway, by reducing the levels and the costs of treatment provided. I think that using the term \u201Ceffectively draining the swamp\u201D says it all of this Government\u2019s attitude towards accident compensation claimants and what is supposed to be a comprehensive rehabilitation and compensation scheme. It certainly is not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWe are seeing Labour\u2019s accident compensation scheme, which was the pride of the world and that put New Zealand up there, along with women getting the vote and our nuclear-free policy\u2014which, oops, would have been gone by lunchtime, and which could well go under a National Government\u2014be reduced now to a shoddy insurance scheme, one that, if its terms and conditions were laid out, no one would sign up to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI also want to talk about people who have hearing loss. [Interruption] I think the Minister\u2019s position is more one of having a closed mind than a lack of hearing. To acknowledge the submitters in this Chamber and the people who gave very comprehensive submissions to the select committee, but for them to see the only acknowledgment of what they said to the select committee in the Green Party\u2019s and Labour Party\u2019s minority view report is an insult to them. I want to talk about the hearing loss provisions, because under the new proposal in the bill hearing loss does not count if it is just a bit of hearing loss. If it is just a bit of hearing loss, irrespective of whether people need hearing aids\u2014irrespective of whether they need that assistance\u2014if it is less than 6 percent hearing loss, then they are not entitled to any assistance. That is just absolutely ridiculous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThere are many, many other things like that. Under Labour, casual and seasonal workers were covered, but under this Government\u2019s bill they will become another group of workers who will miss out on having assistance and coverage. That is an insult to workers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u002269bee42233cd4d30babb729e595dfd13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002269bee42233cd4d30babb729e595dfd13\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the next member, the comments made by Miss Pillay related to Part 2. Hearing loss comes under Part 2. I just remind members that we are on Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca66e57d06d4484db3f9e73f8f7c3d76\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Is that not under clause 6, in Part 1?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259d8e3a622bd4e1db603e3ca0a5c4704\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, but certainly hearing loss is mentioned in detail in clause 52. I call the Hon Ruth Dyson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9f4a025e9eb4dba8a9e3070d3adb4d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9f4a025e9eb4dba8a9e3070d3adb4d1\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills):\u003C/span\u003E I want to talk to just three points in relation to Part 1. The first is the repeal of section 31 under clause 8, the second is the disentitlement for people who wilfully injure themselves or commit suicide, and the third is the great leap backwards that the Minister has decided to take in terms of work capacity. Let me start from that issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EI will make three points in relation to the changes of work capacity. I am reminded of the good old days under Bill Birch, whom I must say Nick Smith is making look quite good in comparison\u2014he is certainly making Murray McCully look good in comparison. In the old days of work capacity, people used to say \u201Cwork cap; kneecap\u201D. Workers who were quite seriously injured got minimal rehabilitation, then went through a shonky assessment process, were told that they were fit to work for 30 hours a week, and were moved to independence, which is what accident compensation was in the olden days of the previous National Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThat meant that they either went on the dole, or they received no income at all if they were married to an income earner and did not meet the criteria for any income from our social security system. This scheme is a great leap backwards to those old days. We have seen a change to the consideration of a person\u2019s pre-injury earning capacity. If somebody who is in a high-income job\u2014it might be a Minister of the Crown\u2014suffers a serious injury, he or she is not able to take on that responsibility any more; he or she is not able to do his or her job. That person is assessed for work, and it is determined that he or she is able to work for 30 hours a week, as a cleaner in a Minister\u2019s office. There is a big income gap between the earnings of a Minister and the earnings of a cleaner in a ministerial office, but that will now meet the criteria for being assessed as fit to work, because that person\u2019s pre-injury earning capacity has been biffed out. Instead of the assessors having a \u201Crequirement\u201D to consider someone\u2019s pre-injury earning capacity, the word has been changed to \u201Cmay\u201D. The officials confirmed to the select committee that the word \u201Cmay\u201D means the assessors may or they may not consider someone\u2019s pre-injury earning capacity. That is an absolute outrage. It is outrageous to forget what a person has lost as a result of an injury, in terms of how much income he or she is able to attract because of his or her skill and hard work. That is the first great leap backwards in the work capacity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe second is the move from working 35 hours a week, which provides a liveable wage for most people, to working 30 hours a week. How can the primary income earner afford to keep his or her family on 30 hours of work a week? I guess the Minister can, because actually a Minister does not have to work any hours a week, and I would not be surprised if some of them do not work any hours a week. But for a wage earner, working 30 hours a week does not provide a living wage if one is the primary income earner for a family. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe third great leap backwards, just in this single clause in Part 1, is the requirement that the job for which the person is being assessed is a real job that exists in New Zealand. Let me give an example of what used to happen, and what this legislation says can happen again. In the olden days I used to get people coming into my constituency office, saying that they had been assessed as being fit to be a car-park attendant, but there is not one single job as a car-park attendant in New Zealand. Another one had been assessed as being competent to be a lift operator. I remember the days when department stores like James Smith\u2019s, Kirkcaldie and Stains, and Ballantynes in Christchurch had lift operators. I do not know that I went into the lifts in Smith and Caughey\u2019s, to be honest. The lift operators would ask people which floor they would like to go to, sir or madam, and they would push the button. When people arrived at the floor, the lift operator would tell them what was on that floor, just to make sure people got it right. We do not have those sorts of jobs any more. Having an assessment that says one is fit to be a lift operator means nothing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u0022fdb4fb155a7047469b32d9a5651026b9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fdb4fb155a7047469b32d9a5651026b9\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I challenge both Ruth Dyson and Maryan Street, in the sense that they have decided to get quite personal in this debate on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. Let us just talk direct. During the period that Ruth Dyson and Maryan Street were Ministers for ACC, the unfunded liabilities grew by $13 billion. It is all very well to wear one\u2019s heart on one\u2019s sleeve, but the truth is that we cannot provide accident compensation security for ordinary New Zealanders if we are driving the scheme broke. That is exactly what those two Ministers did, and it is a matter of public record.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242c33ade1e744f219f95af1d5974efd2\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The Minister\u2019s comments have no bearing at all on Part 1 of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022efc888c8e5554faa82f925b922f93bf9\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I know this is a robust debate; words are flying around. We cannot call someone \u201Cchicken\u201D. I heard that from somewhere. We will not have that sort of language. This is a robust debate. If the Minister wants to refer to some points that have been made previously, that is fine, but the Minister cannot concentrate his 5-minute speech on those rebuttal points. I ask him to come back to Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b37223f40f8f4f0eb6bd7dc89dea86e6\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I used the word you refer to, and I withdraw and apologise. It was inappropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6504c614d88406ab4004b04824dd0d1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229de4ba000b444ba68403dcc445a2d061\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The issue is that the member Ruth Dyson has just got to her feet and said\u2014[Interruption] I raise a point of order, Mr Chairman. You have insisted that during the course of contributions from members, I do not interject. Every time I have attempted to answer, after members opposite have challenged me to get to my feet and answer their points, I have been shouted down by members who have moved their seats\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e00e25e8c254b5f91c55e16fabfb796\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I will determine the level of interjections, and whether they are acceptable or not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b90f51b6d7a49f99534808a7c367310\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Members opposite have argued that it is inhumane for the work test in this bill to be 30 hours. They argue that it is not reasonable for the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) to tell somebody that if he or she can work for 30 hours a week, that is a reasonable requirement. The simple question I have for Labour members is why it is OK for the test to be 30 hours for someone who is on a sickness or invalids benefit, but not for someone on accident compensation. During the entire period of the previous Labour Government, 30 hours was the test used by the Statistics New Zealand, the Inland Revenue Department, and Work and Income. Why would we have a different definition when it comes to accident compensation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe last point I want to cover is very sensitive, and it is related to suicide. We have had those arguments. I think it is going way beyond the margins to blame people for causing suicide. It is an awful tragedy. There are far too many suicides in New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022194a34c958434006a8d7b149d682ba44\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, what concern!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205def280a9c04cbe8919c65b66dcd291\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I simply challenge Ruth Dyson that if she and members opposite really believe that the accident compensation system should cover suicide, they should note that Owen Woodhouse, the architect of the scheme, did not include suicide in it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfd1d9f948be4e16b48739475eb858f2\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re dead, for goodness sake. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255e0afd803a84e64be6aaa0ca34458e3\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I ask Ruth Dyson whether she, with all her passion, is giving an absolute commitment that a future Labour Government will put suicide back into the scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231792ab6c40e4132a1ddbb4d00857340\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: We put it into the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022455998147b734084b42a3c5fcf2ae4e0\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Will she put it back in? It is a simple challenge. I have been in this House a wee while and I have heard all sorts of passionate debates, but the real test for Labour members as to whether they really believe that is whether they will give an unequivocal commitment they will put it back. Members can see that they are silent, are they not? Is it not interesting? It shows it is all puff. I think they know, and in fact I am sure the Labour spokesperson for ACC, David Parker, knows in his heart of hearts that it was a mistake for Labour to extend accident compensation without the funding\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229fb71ea876284036bb4ecdf877bd3a58\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Rubbish. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262240c3e389243afa7428d83f81edb5e\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The member Ruth Dyson says it was a mistake, just like it was a mistake when she extended free physiotherapy into the scheme. [Interruption] Mr Parker says that was a mistake. I am looking forward to seeing Ruth Dyson stand up in this Chamber and apologise for introducing free physiotherapy. Does Labour now accept that it was a mistake? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b73a389bda274f4fb309e58c6488d7c3\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. This is the Minister\u2019s eighth call in this Part 1 debate. He has not referred to Part 1 yet. He has made personal allegations, and they have gone far of the mark. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266b2f0f06a0c4300a1097d74ed724629\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I hear what the member says. I will determine whether we have gone outside the scope of the debate, but I ask all members to concentrate on Part 1. When we look at Part 1, there are a number of clauses on which I have yet to hear any debate. There is a lot of material here that can be debated. I ask for the debate to be concentrated on Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022064b21b7233248fcb5691e27af0c9b36\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: A key part of Part 1 is the decision that suicide and self-harm is a tragedy but not an accident. It is a very simple point, and it is a point on which there is a difference in the Committee. My simple challenge to members\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022929a8d7ef9c74879bccf2a644af212ca\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: Tell family members that. Tell family members who have to live with the blame and the shame. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a65193b533743d893b789a9df43a40a\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member Steve Chadwick where the funding was when the previous Labour Government extended the scheme to include suicide and self-harm. I searched under the desk; I searched in every corner. In fact, in the first year I became Minister, the accident compensation scheme made a loss of $4.8 billion. Members of the Labour Party are in denial that there is any sort of issue. The simple fact is that if expenses rise\u2014when we extend the scheme and do not fund it\u2014we end up in financial difficulty. Change is required; that is what Part 1 is about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022 data-id=\u002296fcb478baca483daf6175c2faf14aa4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002296fcb478baca483daf6175c2faf14aa4\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E It seems to me that this is a very fundamental debate. The one very fundamental issue driving this debate is that this country has an accident compensation scheme that we literally cannot afford. It comes down to that very basic fact. When we look at why we cannot afford it, we see that in the last 4 years, claims paid by the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) have increased from $2.2 billion to more than $3.5 billion. Claims have increased by 57 percent over 4 years and, as we have heard, that is five times the rate of inflation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EWhat choices does the Government have? It can leave the scheme as it is currently, and costs can go up next year, the year after, and the year after, but what will happen eventually is there will be protests on the steps of Parliament, as we had with the motorcyclists late last year. People will rise up in protest when what they are being asked to pay for the service that is being provided becomes too great. We see a parallel right now in Greece. That country is verging on bankruptcy, and we see a Government there that has not made the hard decisions that are required. This Government is accepting the fact that we have a scheme that the country cannot afford. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EI ask myself what has driven the increases in the costs of claims, and I break those issues into three areas. We have heard that the scope of the accident compensation scheme has been significantly widened since it was first introduced, and after the Labour Party came into Government in 1999. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a11d305d180b4184b831b6d982c33765\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: 6 percent of the increase in liabilities; only 6 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274533e4761184f25b9553618fbdd7214\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Parker talks about 6 percent of the liabilities. I am not sure exactly what he is talking about, but I read in the select committee report that the payments for claims paid out by ACC over the last 4 years have increased from $2.2 billion to $3.5 billion. What country can sustain a 57 percent increase over 4 years? If nothing is done about it, we will end up in exactly the same situation as Greece now finds itself, and Spain will likely find itself. That is right; that is exactly what we will find ourselves in. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EDuring its term the Labour Government obviously extended the scope of the scheme in many ways. We have heard this afternoon about extensions to cover suicide\u2014compensation for members of a person\u2019s deceased family. We have talked about the extension to physiotherapy services, and the change from 30 hours to 35, and now the proposal to change it back to 30 hours. There have been a significant number of entitlement increases, and that is one of the reasons that drive the cost of compensation increases. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EThere have been demographic and technological changes. During the second reading debate, Maryan Street talked about advances in medical science. She talked about the fact that 20 years ago people who had accidents and might have died now live, and they live on at great cost. Life is precious, but if we can save a person\u2019s life and give them any sort of meaningful life, then I support that. But that is a cost paid by society. We also heard from David Parker that as people age, their bones become more brittle. I think he said that they break more easily. As our demographics change, as our society grows older, we will have bigger costs relating to accident compensation claims. Without any changes to entitlements, but just from the simple ageing of society and through the development of medical technology, the costs of those claims will increase. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EI believe there is a third reason why the costs of claims have blown out, and I put the responsibility for this clearly back with the previous Labour Government. Yes, entitlements are being reduced. There is a move in this bill to wind back entitlement. I put the claim fairly and squarely with the members of the previous Government who are sitting on the Opposition benches. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EOne of the fundamental changes that the previous Labour Government made when it first came to power was to scrap choice in accident compensation cover. The previous National Government opened up the work account to competition. Five separate insurance companies were offering cover, in addition to ACC. There was a choice in the provider, and premiums dropped by some 30 percent. But more important, when the account is opened up to competition, the competing providers of accident compensation have a massive incentive to try to rehabilitate people to get them back to work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229cc2a5cd07144a1daba4e3cc4c053a1a\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Utter rubbish.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225949a8b7522d4ffcb85c25a355ee1e63\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN\u003C/span\u003E: So if you are an insurer in private business, you would be happy to have the claim go on, year after year? Let me explain. If you open up the work account to competition\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cd7f71a623f40e38b2c083e6ac14938\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The member cannot bring the Chair into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ded9497578c4fb88a4e4c3c6ca97d1c\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise, Mr Chair. The previous Labour Government closed down choice; it closed down competition. The tragedy of that is that we did not see the continued reduction in rehabilitation rates and prevention rates; we saw a blowout in increases. In fact the Minister in the chair, the Hon Nick Smith, spoke about the increasing rate of accidents. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EWe can talk about the cost of compensation, but what about the human cost? What about the cost to workers? What about the cost to ordinary New Zealanders who have accidents? What about the cost to ordinary workers who have accidents that could have been prevented, whether or not they occurred in the workplace? The great tragedy of what happened in 2000, when the offer of choice and of competition was taken away by the previous Labour Government, is that it resulted in an increase in accidents and a further contribution to the blowout in claims. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EThere has been a huge blowout in the cost of claims. The reality is that the Government has to do something. We have a choice. Either we can continue to accept that accident compensation claims will go up by 12 or 13 percent per annum ad infinitum and take the consequences of that, or we can seek to address it. I believe the National Government has done a very good job of trying to address the fundamental cause of accident compensation claims increasing at five times the rate of inflation, in the way that they have. Thank you, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u00221bd0f4e6a2564d8ba06b0210a8ca423c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221bd0f4e6a2564d8ba06b0210a8ca423c\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills):\u003C/span\u003E I took a call earlier in this debate, which is, with respect to Mr Boscawen, on Part 1 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. It is not a general debate on the history of the Labour Party and ACT\u2019s view of it. When I took an earlier call in this debate, I said I wanted to talk about three points in Part 1 of this amendment bill. The third point was about work capacity\u2014the great leap backwards that the Minister of ACC is instigating. Unfortunately, the Minister took a call as I was just about to make a point that I had hoped he would agree with and say \u201CYou\u2019re right. We\u2019ll change this and make it fair.\u201D But because he interrupted me, he did not get a chance to do that. So, perhaps, he might. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe point is this: under the amendment that the Minister is putting through the House under urgency, there will no longer be a requirement through the work capacity assessment procedure to ensure that the job that the person is determined to be able to do is a real job. I started giving examples of real-life New Zealanders who, under the old system that is now being brought back into our society by this amendment bill, were determined to be fit to be a car-park attendant, a lift operator, or, in one tragic example, a person was assessed as being able to work for 30 hours as a tap dancer. This is not a made-up story; I really wish it were. I wish it were funny. I wish that that person had not had to go through the humiliation not only of being fit to be able to be a tap dancer for 30 hours a week and getting the letter from the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) congratulating that person\u2019s move to independence, but also the humiliation of appearing on the Paul Holmes show with one leg, showing that that person would be really hard pushed to be a tap dancer. That person had one leg, but because that had not been the result of an injury, it was not classed as being an issue for the assessor. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThat is the shonky nonsense that that Minister, his Government, and his supporting ACT and M\u0101ori Party members will bring back into this House. Why would members do that? Why would members do that to good, hard-working, ordinary New Zealanders who happen to have had the misfortune of being injured at work? Why would the Minister, his colleagues, and his supporting parties want anyone to have to go through the humiliation of having an assessment for a job that does not exist? Why would they want them to have the humiliation of being told they are fit to be a car-park attendant or a lift operator and then have no income and no job to go to? Being fit to do a job that does not exist is no help when one has to go and pay one\u2019s grocery bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EI urge the Minister in the remaining stages of this debate to put in a little Supplementary Order Paper so that we do not have to put good, hard-working, injured New Zealanders through that humiliation. Review and appeal by Paul Holmes and John Campbell should be a thing of the past. We should have legislation that is fair, that treats injured workers with respect, and that gives them the support and rehabilitation they deserve in order to get back to a job so they can support their families. This legislation does not do it. It is a disgrace and it hurts people who do not deserve to be hurt by our law. All they have done is to be injured; I cannot imagine why anyone would want to make their life worse for them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe other two points I want to talk on in the remaining time\u2014perhaps I will have time for only one\u2014are in relation to clause 8 in Part 1, which repeals section 31. Section 31 relates to the ministerial advisory panel on work-related gradual process disease or infection. I am puzzled to know why the Minister thinks he has enough knowledge, given that it is clear that medical experts internationally look to each other for help. But the Minister thinks, for some reason, which is of a puzzle to every single person in this Parliament, let alone to the public, that he knows better than every medical expert around the world. The evolution of understanding about gradual process disease and infection has been rapid. If our legislation is not based on the best possible advice to the Government, then people who are affected at work, who have asbestosis, lung cancer, hearing loss, and brain injury because they have been exposed to solvents, may not get the compensation and rehabilitation that they deserve. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EIn this area, New Zealand is woefully ignorant. The establishment of this ministerial advisory panel sought to move us to a place where we could be part of the international debate and where we could look at young men whose brain cells have been turned to mush by exposure to solvents when they have been doing their apprenticeships as spray painters. We might be able to stop future young men having that damage occur to their brain cells. But, no, the Minister knows better. \u201CLet their brain cells turn to mush.\u201D is what he says. He does not need any advice. He knows better than any other person what is wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e88fc12e5fe84d698a8b52cfdb848915\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON\u003C/span\u003E: Before we adjourned for the dinner break, I was talking about the work capacity process, which has been significantly amended in Part 1 of this legislation. The work capacity process determines whether people, having been injured and gone through some rehabilitation and perhaps treatment, are able to be exited from accident compensation\u2014or moved to independence, as this process used to be called\u2014because they have recovered from their injury and have been rehabilitated to the point where they can now be moved off the scheme. In order to determine that exit, those people go through a work capacity process. Currently, the work capacity process requires people to be determined as being able to work for 35 hours a week. That is about the level that we would consider that somebody would be able to keep his or her family. On a 35-hour a week wage, it would be a bit of a struggle if it were a low wage, but that is the minimum at which we can expect that to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThose people have to be determined as having a real job, and I will come back to that in a minute, because I want to explain the difference between what Nick Smith and his colleagues in National, ACT, and the M\u0101ori Party are proposing to do to the integrity of this assessment, and what the situation is currently. The third part is that, under the current legislation, what a person was earning before the injury is taken into consideration. So if one is in a very high-earning job and one has a significant injury, one cannot be determined as fit to work in a very, very low-paid job. I use the example of a Minister of the Crown. Ministers of the Crown get paid quite well compared with the rest of the country. If a Minister has an injury, currently the Minister could not go through the work capacity assessment process and be determined as being fit to be a car-park attendant, because that is not a real job in New Zealand as there are no car-park attendants; he could not be determined as being fit to be a lift operator, because we no longer have lift operators in New Zealand; and he could not be determined to have any other capacity to do a job unless that job was one that a person could get in New Zealand. We are real about what capacity we have and about what jobs people might be able to get. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EBut the other consideration that is currently in the law is that the earning capacity of the Minister is taken into account. So not only could the assessor not tell a Minister of the Crown that he is fit to be a lift operator\u2014because there is no such job, so he could not do that\u2014but also the assessor could not say that the Minister is currently earning around $200,000 a year but that in the work capacity assessment process, the assessor has decided that the Minister could get a job cleaning a Minister\u2019s office. The assessor could say that you are able to do that and that your injury has left you in such a state that you can do that job. Well, you could not currently do that, Mr Chairman\u2014not you personally\u2014unless you were a work capacity assessor. But an assessor could not say that one is off accident compensation and able to do a job that was well below one\u2019s current earning capacity. That is a fair way to treat injured people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EUnder this amendment, that goes. A person can be determined to have any job at all, whether or not it is real, so we could see the Minister having an injury and being determined as being fit to be an interplanetary traveller. That might be the job that he is determined fit to be in, and I hope that he does well on that galactic travel. He will not have to be assessed on only 30 hours, as currently the situation is for 35 hours a week. That is not bad on a Minister\u2019s salary, because it does not matter how many hours a Minister works, but if one is on a minimum wage, then the difference of 5 hours a week is huge. Nor does the assessor have to take into that calculation pre-injury earning capacity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe work capacity assessment process is, in a word, unfair. That is what Nick Smith is responsible for doing to injured workers in our country, and Labour will oppose this every step of the way because it is just wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe final point I will make in this contribution to Part 1 is with regard to the clause that I most resent. It is the clause that I have found the Minister in the chair, the Minister for ACC, has inclined himself towards making the most distasteful comments on, which are the comments that I personally know, from holding conversations with people outside this Parliament, have been extremely hurtful to them and their families. It is clause 10, which inserts new section 119 in the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act. This part of the Act allows people who have wilfully inflicted an injury on themselves or people who have attempted or committed suicide to have entitlement granted to them, if they are still alive, or their family if they are dead. I would just ask the Minister one question, and that is what he has against people who commit suicide. I ask what it is about their families that makes them less worthy of recognition under a comprehensive injury prevention, rehabilitation, and compensation scheme. I ask what it is about people who are dead because they have deliberately committed suicide, who have deliberately considered that they wanted to end their life, had had enough of this world, and had nothing to live for, quite literally. Why do those people\u2019s families not deserve their earnings-related compensation and support for the funeral grant in the same way as the family of a person who falls asleep, loses control of his or her car, accidentally smashes into a tree, and dies deserve that funeral grant? Why is that family more deserving than are the families whose husband, wife, son, or daughter chose to take their life? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EHow can that be fair? Well, it is not fair. It is a huge insult to people who have ended their lives, for an often inexplicable reason. It is made even worse, because the family members of someone who has chosen to end his or her life always ask themselves whether they should have done something more to try to prevent that. They ask whether there was something that happened today, yesterday, last week, or last year that they could have done differently that would have stopped their husband, wife, brother, sister, son, or daughter from taking their own life. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EOn top of the huge question that they have as to why they lost that person, on top of the guilt they feel, and on top of asking themselves what they could have done better\u2014questions that cannot be answered, because their family member is dead\u2014the Minister is saying that because their brother, sister, son, or daughter deliberately took their life rather than the death just happening in a car crash or in a plane crash, or when that person was walking across the road, this family is worth less to New Zealand society in terms of what support we should give them, than the family that lives down the road. That is just a total disgrace. The Minister had the audacity to quote Sir Owen Woodhouse. Well, Sir Owen may well have a comment to make, and he is more than capable of making it directly to the Minister. But I have to say to the Minister that, by saying that Sir Owen Woodhouse said originally\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022 data-id=\u002258f354b47cfe45fa9653328e14f2b09a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002258f354b47cfe45fa9653328e14f2b09a\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E Ruth Dyson asked the Minister in the chair, the Minister for ACC, what he has against people who commit suicide. My response to that is to ask Ruth Dyson what she has against people whose loved ones die of cancer or of heart disease. The Minister said earlier this evening that there is no basis for that distinction. Someone who is struck down with cancer or with heart disease at a very, very early age does not get the income that\u2014[Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210ebf611e4e142559d5eb56fbf787058\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairman. During the course of Ruth Dyson\u2019s contribution, despite portions of her contribution being quite offensive, members on the Government benches, including Mr John Boscawen, who clearly did not agree with her listened to her courteously. From the moment that John Boscawen has attempted to answer the very questions that Ruth Dyson challenged members of the Government to answer, she and Maryan Street, who is sitting next to her, have shouted a barrage of remarks, to the point where I could not hear a word of what Mr Boscawen was saying. I think that interjections need to be rare and reasonable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e4b76bb4b9746fdb2edf3d354ed2090\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Chairperson\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d7c75fe94144dc688178571014c3e5f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I do not need any assistance with this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219b06941604e4856a0f866c892f24c54\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: He thinks it\u2019s a big joke.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b153b62449c447b7a73637b02227586e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Excuse me! The Committee is entitled to robust debate and, with due respect to the Minister, one of the reasons he could not hear John Boscawen speak was that the member stopped and let the barrage of comments continue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d23cbbee215d40a39b9f9a7f6cd3d14c\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I couldn\u2019t hear him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b111adc717464909900960135802c5c1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: He did stop. I am keen for this debate to be robust, but I will not have the debate interrupted unnecessarily. The point has been made, and it has merit, that the interjections should not be to the extent that they interrupt the flow of the debate. I say to members, let us have a robust debate, and let us speak loudly and forcefully. That is good; that is Parliament at its best. But let us make sure we can hear the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd2052ace8954335bdec1bf8c954937f\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I support your ruling, Mr Chairperson. I just hope it extends to ensuring that the Minister does not use his live microphone to interject on speakers who are speaking. For example, when the Hon Ruth Dyson was speaking Dr Smith chose to interject on her, using the live microphone that is in front of him. The Minister shakes his head, but it is clear that he did that. I heard it but I did not interrupt, because I thought there was a free flow. But if he interrupts the debate himself as the Minister in charge of the bill to make that point, then I think he has to exercise some self-discipline himself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022823111d4a76544d28e57700cc6aa9e37\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I say to the member that points of order should be raised at the time. The member\u2019s point of order has expired; the time has gone. I try to put my finger on the microphone. It is very difficult, in the heat of debate, for people to be completely restrained. I have had difficulty myself. On occasions I have been seriously challenged; it is difficult. Let us get on with the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cde2f26e0415484399383f15986ce274\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, and I thank Mr Smith for his point of order. The Chair is quite right; I had deliberately stopped speaking, because I was not prepared to speak into that barrage of criticism. The Labour members seem to have their heads in the sand. The last time that I rose, I raised the issue that claims paid by the Accident Compensation Corporation had increased by 57 percent over the last 4 years. Let me make it clear to the Opposition that the increase is from $2.2 billion a year to $3.6 billion a year. The Government has a choice: it either addresses that issue or continues to see claims go up by 12 percent per annum until the country is broke. This Government is far more responsible than to see that occur. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EI want to come to the issue of the rating of employers and the levies they pay. Ruth Dyson said in her earlier speech that I was not addressing Part 1. Part 1 clearly makes provision for employers to be rated on their claims history: on their ability to prevent accidents. We currently have a rating system whereby different classes of employment attract different rates. Naturally someone involved in a very passive job, like sitting in a clerical job, may be paying, say, $1 per $100 worth of earnings, or it might be 50c per $100 of earnings, whereas someone in a much riskier industry\u2014it could be forestry, where there are a lot of saws and falling timber; it is a far more dangerous occupation and a far more dangerous industry\u2014pays a much higher rate than that. This bill makes provision to rate employers within a particular industry differently from one another, based on their claims experience. It creates something very, very important, and that is incentive. It is very important to get the incentives right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003ELet us take someone in the sawmilling industry who employs people to go out with chainsaws and cut down timber in our forests. If such employers are able to instil in their employees better safety standards and better procedures so they can achieve a much lower rate of accidents for that particular industry, why would we not reward those employers? Why would we not create an incentive, so that employers are incentivised to do whatever they can to reduce the rates of accidents? From the employers\u2019 point of view, they have the advantage of being able to reduce the levies they pay for accident compensation, but, more important, if it reduces accidents, is that not what we should be trying to do? We should be trying to reduce accidents. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EWe have had from the Opposition this afternoon a barrage of criticism in respect of reforms that are sorely needed. The Minister has made it very clear that the rate of injuries and the rate of accident prevention issues have worsened in the last 8 or 9 years. I come back again to the fact that in 1999, when the previous Labour Government was first elected, premiums were some 30 percent lower than at present. Rather than allowing employees and employers to continue to have choice, to continue to have competition to drive down those rates, the Labour Government came in with a policy of abolishing that choice, and New Zealand has seen the consequences of that. And, yes, entitlements are being reduced in this bill. They are being reduced because, quite frankly, the country simply cannot afford them. The country simply cannot afford them, because although claims can increase by 12 percent per annum for 1 year or for 4 years, we cannot do that indefinitely. This Government is introducing mechanisms to create the right incentives.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u00228425b31217774a30a517de36efafbd06\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228425b31217774a30a517de36efafbd06\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to address clause 14, which is about experience and risk rating. Clause 14 allows for regulations that would establish experience rating and risk sharing in respect of the work account. It states that such systems may include no-claims bonuses, higher or lower levies, and claim thresholds. Proponents of this amendment will argue that it provides employers with an incentive to keep the claim numbers down, and that, I think, is what we have been hearing from the previous speaker. But, unfortunately, keeping claim numbers down is not necessarily the same thing as keeping injury numbers down. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EExperience rating has been criticised on the basis that it gives rise to the likelihood that employers will seek to access the benefit from the experience rating system by encouraging workers not to lodge claims or to disguise workplace injuries as non-work injuries. If experience rating is also linked to the total cost of an employer\u2019s claim, this will give rise to the likelihood of undue pressure being placed on workers to return to work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EAt the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee we heard from many, many submitters who have been involved in this and who were involved during a previous time\u2014in the 1990s, actually\u2014when we did have experience rating, and their evidence from the 1990s, and from overseas, indicates that experience rating is a crude tool that cannot accurately reflect the safety performance of employers or improve their performance, and it can lead to pressure being applied to workers not to report their injuries. That is the real concern of the Labour members. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThere are real questions about whether financial incentives work in improving worker safety. During the select committee process we asked about this and we got information about it, but the Labour members are not satisfied with the answers. We draw the attention of the stocktake to a current consultation being conducted by WorkCover South Australia, which is reviewing its penalty bonus system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe authors of the discussion document, who worked with PricewaterhouseCoopers to gain a better understanding of the system, found that there were only very weak links between the bonus penalty rate and claims outcomes. No evidence was found to suggest that the bonus penalty scheme has delivered better health and safety outcomes for workers. The authors also conducted a literature search and concluded that the majority of findings in the literature review were negative towards the experience rating systems. Also, studies supporting experience rating tended to be less robust than those against. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003ESo, as I said, we heard a significant number of submissions about concerns in respect of experience rating. If we go back to the last time we had this kind of provision under New Zealand legislation, we have to go back to the 1990s, when the last National Government had that kind of provision under private insurance. The experiences were pretty grim, actually. What we heard from submitters, and from the experiences of people who were involved in that at the time, was pretty inevitable because the profit incentives overrode everything.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThere were arguments about who was covered and who was responsible, and workers got caught between those arguments. There were many instances of spurious rejections, as, firstly, workers had to prove that the accident happened while they were on the job, and not outside of their job, and, secondly, workers had to jump through a range of hoops time and time again. Many had huge battles to get their claims heard, at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI am trying to find, as I speak, the claims the National Government made back in the 1990s about experience rating and what that actually meant. Members of that National Government talked about the wonderful nirvana we would have, where workplaces that had lower accident rates would somehow have lower levies, and those that did not would have higher levies. That did not happen, of course. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022 data-id=\u00222998b90ee4e145eeb3ce3f45abe260c3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222998b90ee4e145eeb3ce3f45abe260c3\u0022\u003EALLAN PEACHEY (National\u2014T\u0101maki):\u003C/span\u003E I appreciate the opportunity to take a call on Part 1 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. This bill has been introduced into the House, it has had its first reading, and it has been to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. The work of the select committee was pretty onerous and time demanding, but we got through it. The bill has had its second reading, and now, even at the Committee stage on Part 1, Labour members are failing to recognise their responsibilities in this matter. I waited through the first reading debate, the deliberations in the select committee, the second reading debate, and this debate on Part 1, and the word \u201Cresponsibility\u201D has not fronted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EThere are levels of responsibility, and before this debate is finished, I hope that Labour will start to show some respect for what the Government is trying to do and what the people of New Zealand need the Government to do. That responsibility is on two levels. Firstly, Labour should accept responsibility for the damage done to the scheme over the last 9 years. Part 1 tries to salvage what was a world-class accident insurance scheme introduced by a National Government. I suspect that that is what Labour members hate most about it; it was a National Government that brought this scheme to New Zealand. I ask them to take responsibility for the damage they caused to that scheme by trying to turn it into a social welfare measure. Secondly, in this Part 1 debate I am looking to Labour to join with the Government to take some shared responsibility for saving the scheme. If we continue to go down the path that Labour wishes to follow in this Part 1 debate and we carry on and go their way, the accident compensation scheme will be destroyed as a viable 24/7 service available to the people of New Zealand. Maybe that is what those Labour members want. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EOne thing has come out of the Part 1 debate today. We had a very, very passionate speech from Mr Parker, full of feeling and full of condescension towards the Minister. That member did one thing that will not be lost on the people of New Zealand: he clearly aligned Labour with the criminal class in New Zealand. There was not one mention of the victims of crime, and that will not have gone unobserved. The list member Mr Parker made a very interesting point. He tried to draw attention in the Part 1 debate to the differences between Labour members and the National Government. The difference was clear: they care more about the criminal class of New Zealand than they care about good, basic, decent New Zealanders. That will be the message that the people of New Zealand take from the contribution that Labour members have made to this debate on Part 1. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EI repeat my invitation to the next Labour speaker who gets on his or her feet to do the decent thing, take responsibility, and admit that Part 1 fixes up a system that Labour almost destroyed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u00220a6bc7f30b0347c18ed3059afb00bb27\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a6bc7f30b0347c18ed3059afb00bb27\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I wish to take up some of the challenge of the previous speaker, Allan Peachey, not least because it was a repeated misrepresentation of some of the nonsense we have previously heard from the Minister in the chair, the Minister for ACC, which was ably refuted by my colleague Moana Mackey. I am not going to go over the answers; I just ask that member to have a look at the Hansard for Moana Mackey\u2019s speech, which shot down that stupid claim very easily.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI want to deal with two things in particular, and they go to the question of responsibility, I say to Mr Peachey. The first thing I want to refer to is clause 10, again, and I ask members opposite and the Minister to consider the word \u201Ccompassion\u201D. This legislation lacks any compassion. In the rush to perpetuate the Minister\u2019s falsehoods around the financial status of the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), he has wrapped values and sentiments with which Labour does not associate\u2014and the lack of compassion is one of them. If the Minister had ever bothered to talk to the architect of the accident compensation scheme, Sir Owen Woodhouse\u2014who is a member of the Order of New Zealand, in his 90s, and still well able to lecture the Minister on what was meant by the system and how it is working\u2014he would have found that, in fact, suicide was intended to be in the original report. It was intended to be there. I ask the Minister to ask Sir Owen Woodhouse, instead of sitting there shaking his head like a clown at a sideshow in a fair. All he needs to do is open his mouth and then he would have the complete picture. The Minister needs to understand that suicide was always intended to be there. It was simply, as Sir Owen has said elsewhere, the religious convictions of one of the commissioners that compensation should not be paid out to people who were committing, in that commissioner\u2019s view, a mortal sin, that prevented it from being there at that time 40 years ago. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EWe have come a long way since then. I think of the young people I know who have attempted suicide and survived. They have survived for a range of reasons, not the least being good medical intervention, and then they have rehabilitated through the provisions of the accident compensation scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI ask members opposite not to throw away compassion in some drive\u2014misguided though it be\u2014to make the scheme seemingly more cost-effective. There is more at stake here than money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI want to go to the next point, which is about responsibility. One of the things that has always been a difficulty\u2014or at least it was in the 9 years when Labour was previously in Government\u2014is to address injury prevention and to address rates of rehabilitation that beleaguer some of our efforts and some of the things we aspire to achieve through our accident compensation scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe injury prevention issue was taken so seriously by the previous Government\u2014unlike this Minister, who wants to wipe it out of the language and the name of this legislation\u2014that a cross-disciplinary injury prevention strategy was devised. My predecessor in the portfolio, Ruth Dyson, launched it, and I had the privilege of working along with the people who were trying to prevent injury. There were six work streams. I will not go through all the details, but I just say that some of them were obvious: road transport accidents, drownings, violence, falls, and suicide prevention. Those were some of the work streams under the injury prevention strategy. They brought together officials from justice, police, corrections, health, and education\u2014a raft of officials from across Government departments\u2014to address injury prevention.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003ESome interesting findings came out of that, not the least of them being that across all six of the work streams alcohol was a factor. So 19 percent of drownings are affected by alcohol. People go out on a boat, have a few drinks, fall over the edge, and that is it\u201419 percent, or one in five, more or less. Similarly, falls are precipitated, in large measure, by alcohol. We know that alcohol accounts for a significant proportion of our road transport accidents. It also accounts for at least 30 percent of the violent acts that are done in public places, not to mention domestic violence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EWhat was the purpose of all of that? The purpose of those work streams, and finding out that information, was precisely to take responsibility for injury prevention at a Government level, across a raft of Government departments. We started to see some improvements. We have seen fewer drownings in recent years than in years before. We have seen a drop in road transport accidents and deaths. We have seen some awareness begin about the kinds of things that need to be done in order to effect a comprehensive and complicated injury prevention strategy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis bill not only erases injury prevention from the very title and from the purpose of the legislation, but completely negates any sense of compassion and any sense of the purpose of education. What did we hear frequently from National members when they were in Opposition? We heard a lot about the nanny State, and we heard that they did not like Government ads on television. They did not like the Government interfering and telling people how to run their lives, like how to be safe in the water, how to avoid road transport accidents, how to drink sensibly, or how to avoid and to report domestic violence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003ESo what did we have from the nanny State-ists opposite? We had the accusation that the Government should be playing no part in this. I tell Mr Peachey that that is irresponsible, and it is what his party and that wretched, wretched Minister is doing. He is not applying any sense of responsibility to injury prevention and to accidents in this legislation. Labour is the party that took responsibility for trying to address injury prevention and rehabilitation rates. From that Minister we get half-truths and stuff that is purely misleading, and that is the least polite thing I can say about it in the Chamber. That Minister is misleading. Not only that, he is incompetent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis is a serious issue that works across a range of Government departments and goes right to the heart of the responsibility of a Government for its citizens. If we have the information and we know that alcohol affects six of the main causes of injury, it is a Government\u2019s responsibility to do something about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a57ef12622e04d939f9e61f2944a96b7\u0022\u003EHon Dr Jonathan Coleman\u003C/span\u003E: What did you do about it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276b7701cb74e4c1888995fb1c0b1db16\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: It is not the Government\u2019s responsibility\u2014I say to Dr Coleman, who is a medical practitioner\u2014to sit behind papers and pretend that what the Minister for ACC says is even remotely useful. It is a disgrace. This is a disgrace. This legislation will take us back, because no responsibility is being taken for injury prevention or for rehabilitation. Yes, these are difficult issues, but they will not be solved, cured, or addressed in our society by legislation that takes away any focus on injury prevention and that denies compassion. I do not want to be in that society.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u0022f7564512a5b44637848d280feadba465\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f7564512a5b44637848d280feadba465\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E The member Maryan Street has the cheek to talk about responsibility in relation to our accident compensation scheme. Let us look at the facts that relate to her period as Minister for ACC. Which Minister was responsible for running the scheme down so badly that during her last year as the Minister, it incurred a loss of $2.4 billion? I ask Maryan Street, what was irresponsible, having declared to this Parliament a loss of $2.4 billion, about then adding 12 additional aspects to the scheme? Which members in this Chamber believe that those unfunded extensions were responsible? They were not. That member is unfit to ever hold a ministerial warrant in this country again in any area where she has financial responsibility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EEven worse than that, Maryan Street was advised in July 2008 of the $300 million shortfall in the non-earners account. What did she do? She hid it. She hid it, in breach of the Public Finance Act. In fact, it is a matter of public record\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022124a1ad1603846298bb6d0f402600ab8\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The Minister knows that there was an inquiry, which said that was not true. The Minister has misled the Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c94325b23f645f787bb6f8aaf3e381d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Points of order are about order. The member is making a point about the content of what a person said. That is not about order; that is a debatable point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002238ffee74a89b4954bd8ecffba9a60291\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. This is a fresh point of order. I accept your ruling. Is it in order for the member who is on his feet to accuse another member in the Chamber of breaking the law?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221270a03e1c7f4b438b89c910a381511c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I would make two points to the member. Firstly, generally, it is not. Secondly, at the moment when the offence was committed, the member should have taken a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224776fc306e9748bd96d3b66e12c57b1f\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: She did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022941e32fa6a464a12b4b40caa9ef86653\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: No, the member Maryan Street was not saying it was an accusation about breaking the law; her point of order was on a slightly different tack from that. Had the member said she had been accused of breaking the law, it would have been taken differently. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e382951a70714377ae8504eaf434b4a3\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Let us be very clear about the public record. Labour members are sensitive, and I will tell members why they are sensitive. They know the public will never again trust them with the Treasury benches, given the sort of mismanagement that occurred with regard to the accident compensation scheme. In August 2008, Maryan Street received a memo stating that the non-earners account required an additional appropriation of $300 million. I will tell members how significant that was. Members on this side of the Chamber will know that one of the key issues of the election campaign was the affordability of policies, and we had argued as a front-bench team very tightly over matters as small as $10 million, not $300 million. Let us go back and look at the television clips of the election campaign. Maryan Street knew that when the Government opened the books\u2014and it was the lead story in the middle of the election campaign\u2014there was another $300 million nasty surprise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003ELet me tell the Committee how I started my career as the Minister for ACC. The Prime Minister phoned me on the Sunday night and told me my portfolio mix. I was immediately phoned by officials from the Department of Labour, who offered to fly urgently to Nelson. I said to them that surely I could wait until I had my warrant, but they said it was urgent that I should be aware of a very serious problem in accident compensation\u2014a very serious problem that Maryan Street had known about for months, but that she had swept under the carpet. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EMaryan Street had breached the Public Finance Act, and her career will forever have a black mark for her irresponsibility. I will not be lectured on responsibility in this Chamber by that particular member, who is yet to apologise for the damage that she did to accident compensation. I will talk about some of the facts about Maryan Street\u2019s record. It is a matter of fact that in Maryan Street\u2019s last year, she signed off on Accident Compensation Corporation accounts that showed a $2.4 billion loss. I will tell members how serious that was: last year\u2019s accounts for New Zealand showed an overall loss of $10 billion, and nearly half of that was because of accident compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EBut now that member and her colleagues have the cheek to go on the campaign trail to protest against levy increases, and in the next breath to protest about any reduction in entitlements. Labour is saying to New Zealanders that they can have a fully funded scheme, they can have more entitlements, and they can have reduced levies. Who believes that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dea42f5fd1fa4b97b87ada4ea3122a16\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call Sue Moroney, I just ask the Minister whether he would like to write down the name of the audiologist he went to; I want a test to see whether I have any industrial deafness!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u0022e32b743ba2304dd1989a9c0fa808128d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e32b743ba2304dd1989a9c0fa808128d\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to bring this debate back to Part 1, because I feel that the debate has strayed somewhat. I particularly want to talk about victims. Members on the other side of the Chamber seem to think that members on this side have not thought about victims. Well, I can tell them that we on this side of the Chamber care deeply for victims, and that is why we are opposing this bill. I will tell the Committee, and listeners, a true story about someone who is affected by clause 10\u2014the very unfeeling clause 10 of Part 1. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e05f4181fed4d89bde714bd7f073762\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Is this story about a victim?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269600db5700e44b1b3874ed7bee0b568\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I will name the victim. I think he is known to David Bennett, because I think he has visited David Bennett and been told that he will get no help and support, whatsoever. His name is Bruce Gardiner, and he is from Hamilton. I hope that members on the other side of the Chamber will give the story the respect it deserves, because it is not a very pretty story. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EBruce Gardiner was a milk tanker driver, and he was setting about doing his job one day, just as any other day started out for him. But quite quickly his life was changed for ever, because a very young man ran out in front of Bruce Gardiner\u2019s milk tanker in order to take his own life\u2014in order to commit suicide. Not only has Bruce Gardiner suffered already at the hands of this Government because of the mental injury that he suffered as a result of the trauma associated with that accident; his compensation has already been taken away by this uncaring Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217700296d0ff4d878410ef9bf095ec49\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: He wasn\u2019t even covered by your one, anyway.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f56eb4303513460d9bece1b9c83ba5c0\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, so David Bennett is about to tell the Hon Nick Smith, the Minister in the chair, that when the previous Labour Government passed the bill, Bruce Gardiner had already suffered his mental injury. But Bruce Gardiner has had enough guts, enough courage, to campaign for others who face his situation, because he wants to make sure that no one else faces the living hell that he faced. He did not get any compensation for the mental injury he suffered as a result of being involved in that unfortunate incident. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett does not care, because he thinks that is fine. He thinks it is absolutely fine that not only did Bruce Gardiner not get that compensation at the time but no Bruce Gardiners in the future will ever have that compensation. David Bennett\u2019s Government has made sure of that. It has made sure that people receiving mental injuries through work accidents will not get compensation. So that is one part of the story. The second part of the story\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bcd75cea9f674bf0abb5d23ab0a4af49\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Labour didn\u2019t give it to him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022963ec065a676439689e86a37d82af142\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: The Labour Government did change the law to recognise mental injuries suffered through work accidents, so the member is quite wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EBut the part of the story that really brings us to this bill is that now the family of the young man who caused the issue, the family of the young man who committed suicide, will no longer be able to get compensation under this bill. Bruce Gardiner has told me how horrified he is about that, because after that event changed his life for ever he became very, very involved with the young man\u2019s family. Can members imagine the situation when that accident occurred, and he had to tell the family, because it happened outside the family property?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8b64560d750496d85145666e71ff00c\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: What clause are you talking about?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221087e434d07f441e9a32787a8365fa19\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am talking about clause 10, and I think David Bennett should read the bill. That family now will not get compensation for that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f093684c0aa241e4bcc4fe47347aef92\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: They don\u2019t get it now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af17fd93ab5946679b4cd046ac13156c\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, they can\u2014yes, they can; I think that that absolutely shows the lack of understanding. The compensation that they used to pay for funeral expenses will no longer be available. It will no longer be available under this bill. I really think that the Minister should educate his own caucus about this, because those members do not seem to understand what they are about to vote for. They do not seem to understand that they are about to take that compensation away from families who are already suffering. Through no fault of their own they are paying funeral expenses that are covered now, I tell Mr Bennett, but they will not be covered because of his vote on this bill. Because of clause 10, they will no longer be covered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022 data-id=\u00226a148907411b4039b6856753e843aaa4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226a148907411b4039b6856753e843aaa4\u0022\u003EDr PAUL HUTCHISON (National\u2014Hunua):\u003C/span\u003E I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill\u2014and what a mouthful that is. I must congratulate the excellent Minister, the Hon Nick Smith, on coming to the conclusion that it is appropriate we call this bill the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. I absolutely guarantee that if any Labour member went out on to Lambton Quay and asked anyone what the \u201CIPCR Act\u201D is, they would not know it to fall over it. [Interruption] They would not know it to fall over it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EWe have just heard a very shrill lot of verbiage from the Hon Maryan Street, who was going on about injury prevention. I tell Maryan Street that it would be worthwhile for her to actually look at the annual report for 2009 of the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), which states that despite all the money that Labour put into the scheme, and all the money that Maryan Street lost, the rate of serious non-fatal injuries among all populations has shown an increase. It has gone up from 211,000 in 2005 to 218,000 in 2007. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EThere has been an increase in rates across the road, work, and falls areas. The rates of assault and intentional self-harm are also showing an increase, but that could be a result of reporting behaviour. Finally, the frequency of hospitalisation from serous non-fatal injuries has increased since 2004. That is the legacy of Labour\u2019s contribution to the accident compensation scheme over the last few years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003ELabour members say that they are sorry about it, but the issue is deadly serious. They are simply off the planet. The Hon Nick Smith has explained the situation\u2014because on that side of the Chamber is the previous accident compensation Minister, and the corporation\u2019s last report showed a loss of $4.8 billion. In the year prior to that, the corporation reported a loss of $2.2 billion. That makes that member responsible for a debt of $1,800 for every man, woman, and child in New Zealand. That is a significant amount. The member shakes her head. She will not take responsibility for that very fact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EWe also heard Maryan Street talking about the various Woodhouse principles, and she went on about community responsibility. She said: \u201CIf we all pay a little, we all get a lot.\u201D She went on and said something to the effect that a motorcyclist who comes off his bike, no matter how he has driven his bike, whatever it is, he should still receive and pay the same. This is quite extraordinary left-wing socialist cant. She has totally forgotten the idea of individual responsibility and the basic concept of incentives for better behaviour. This is shown so demonstrably well in the affiliated providers\u2019 scheme. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EThe member might just listen to this. The affiliated providers\u2019 scheme has an excellent record of low premiums, excellent rehabilitation\u2014getting people back into the workforce much faster than anywhere else\u2014and huge interest by industry to actually apply injury prevention. She forgets those basic principles\u2014a human instinct\u2014that must be followed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EI turn now to the speech made by the Hon David Parker. He was talking about just how low the levies are in New Zealand when one looks at the benchmarking programme that is taken throughout Australasia. Once again, we see misleading comments coming from the Labour Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u0022c52e16cc5b38474bae50d05c6ec99d49\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c52e16cc5b38474bae50d05c6ec99d49\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I shall start by commenting on one of the statements made by Dr Paul Hutchison: \u201CWe all pay a little; we all get a lot.\u201D That is exactly what National members say when they talk to the Business Roundtable: \u201CUnder our new tax regime this is the plan: we all pay a little, and we all get a lot.\u201D I know that Paul Hutchison is someone who has got a conscience about health issues, and I feel really sad that he has been pushed into running some sort of silly argument to curry favour with the Minister for ACC.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221478da1d8937438f935bebeb825b35ee\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Last time it was Jonathan Coleman.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022830886e3c4824120abc4c4dc39324e35\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly. I know that other members have spoken about this matter before, but the PricewaterhouseCoopers report found that the administration costs of New Zealand\u2019s accident compensation scheme are lower than those of any other scheme. We must forget the smoke and mirrors that the Minister puts out there, and forget the dog-whistle politics that he puts up in the Chamber, because the reality is that our scheme is the envy of the world. It is the envy not just of our region; it is the envy of the world. Our accident compensation employer levies compare favourably with premiums for worker compensation in Australia. We aspire to be on a par with Australia on wages. Despite the Government not increasing the minimum wage, despite it curbing wage bargaining, and despite it telling many people in the State sector that they cannot have a rise, somehow we magically will raise our wages to match those of Australia! No one here believes that rhetoric, not even Dr Paul Hutchison, who looks slightly bemused. We know that our accident compensation system, premiums, and delivery were\u2014I will not say \u201Care\u201D, and I will go into why I am saying \u201Cwere\u201D\u2014far superior to Australia\u2019s.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWhat has this Government done? It has blown the whistle. It has said \u201CThis is outrageous.\u201D Government members have made complete idiots of themselves in the Chamber\u2014and I say that, Mr Chair, knowing that it is OK to say it\u2014by whipping up a storm about how inappropriate it is to give any form of compensation to prisoners. But we know that that is not the key thing on the minds of ordinary New Zealanders. For them it is about value for money. It is about delivering to the many, not the few. It is about a system that works for all New Zealanders. It is about not seeing their friends, their families, their children, their mothers, their fathers being dealt to by a system that this Government is nothing short of corrupting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI take my hat off to the people who have rallied against this Government. The Minister stated earlier that he has a degree of hearing loss, and somehow that is meant to give him an affinity with people who have suffered an injury. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e948c318b74548f2aafaf29cfdd80a85\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: He didn\u2019t get it from working in a factory.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223635f9d906994b1c9c22edd92dfd2c74\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: No, he probably got it from hearing himself when he is absolutely raging, frothing at the mouth, and going crazy. At the end of the day, I assume that the Minister is saying that he understands the position of people who get a disability or an injury through some form of work-related activity. The reality is that, in terms of people whose hearing is impaired, this Government has imposed a ruling, despite every professional piece of advice being to the contrary, that a hearing loss of less than 6 percent\u2014and I acknowledge my Green colleague here\u2014somehow does not count, somehow is insignificant. Well, I ask the Minister to put himself in the position of people with a hearing loss a little less than 6 percent. I say that it is the professionals who should decide whether funding needs to be given for hearing aids. That decision should be made by the professionals who ascertain what the problem is. This Government is saying that a hearing loss of a little less than 6 percent does not count. It says that that is a small degree of loss, that if people lose a bit of their hearing, it does not count. That is simply not appropriate. It is simply not the reality.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI do not like looking back, but this Government does; that is what it bases its policies for the future on. If we look back, we find that this is exactly what the previous National Government did. One of the first things that it did when it came into power was to cut lump-sum payments for accident compensation. The first thing it did was to say that they were not affordable and we cannot do them. It said that we cannot afford to pay lump-sum payments any more. We are saying that this policy is exactly the same. I believe that this Government is thinking: \u201CRight, lump-sum payments are a little bit controversial at the moment. We got dealt to the last time we cut them. They got reinstated. Let\u2019s take another tack.\u201D So it is talking about cost-cutting in areas that, as I have said before in the House, affect people who are very vulnerable, and often it is very difficult for them to mount a challenge and say that it simply is not fair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThat is why I take my hat off to the many people who came to Parliament Buildings last week to protest. Did the Government have the guts or the gumption to front up when people came to Parliament\u2014the heart of our democracy\u2014to say: \u201CWe protest at this. We don\u2019t think it\u2019s fair.\u201D? Did the Government front up last week when people from the biking community and victims of sexual assault were saying: \u201CThis isn\u2019t working. You\u2019ve got it wrong. It\u2019s not fair.\u201D? No, it did not front up. We have heard the Government\u2019s rhetoric that there are too many clients, they are draining too much out of the system, and the Government has to somehow change it. That is no different from a previous National Government saying that it had to drop lump-sum payments. It is about this Government wanting to cut some money, and cutting it where it can get away with it. Lump-sum payments at the moment are not up for grabs. They were when National came into Government last time. They are a little bit under the radar this time, so this Government will go somewhere else. We on this side of the Chamber are saying that that simply is not acceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThe other area where we are seeing it happen is in terms of workers who are deemed able to return to work. Under the current system, being work-ready was set at being able to work 35 hours. Many of us thought a 40-hour week was a standard week, but 35 hours is the measure in terms of people being deemed to be ready to go back to work. But, no, this Government is saying not 35 hours\u201430 hours. I can see the Minister taking notes and I urge him to stand up to take a call on this specific point. How can the Government deem that any worker in New Zealand can survive on 30 hours\u2019 pay a week? Do not give me the answer \u201CBecause of our wonderful tax breaks.\u201D These people are going to get a GST rise, and we all know that they are not going to get a tax break. The tax breaks, when they come in, will give a windfall to the people at the top. As I heard Dr Paul Hutchison say, \u201CWe all pay a little; we all get heaps.\u201D That is the policy of National in terms of its tax cuts. It is the higher-income earners in New Zealand who pay a little and get a lot. I ask the Minister to stand to his feet and tell the Committee how low-income people, people who are deemed to be ready to go back to work when they can work 30 hours a week, will make ends meet with their escalating GST charges and their escalating doctors\u2019 charges. I ask the Minister to respond to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00227a148576ecd64fa5a6a997c54728a770\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227a148576ecd64fa5a6a997c54728a770\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I want to put just three facts on the table to answer the points and address the misguided thinking of Lynne Pillay. She said the decision about whether somebody gets a hearing aid or not should be made solely by the hearing company that is providing the aid. Well, it is little wonder, I say to Ms Pillay, that during the last 3 years of her term in Government the accident compensation scheme\u2019s claims costs over grew by $1.4 billion. She says that the decision has to be made by the company to protect the person. To pretend that the person who is installing the hearing aid does not have any interest is about as naive as the foolish decision that the previous Government made to provide for free physiotherapy, which even Labour\u2019s own spokesperson for ACC, David Parker, says was a mistake. The reality is that claim costs are out of control because of the loose, woolly thinking of the kind that we have just seen from Lynne Pillay. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI have a very simple answer to the second question. She asked why should the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC)\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254fc4c6f400c4d68af85beb416de6863\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: How much have hearing aids decreased in cost, Minister, in the last 12 months? How much have they decreased?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4592ed921a64ef7bc6460c30e063802\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I cannot answer the questions if Maryan Street is going to continuously shout me down. Those members challenged me to get to my feet and answer the questions\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b8242bbf37c54e4ea8cea5205022659e\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: Well, answer them properly, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f4554c418764ee0bd36d2fd4ebbedf8\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I will. I will answer Lynne Pillay very clearly. Lynne Pillay asked why this bill defines full-time work, or the point where a person can be exited from the scheme, at 30 hours. There is a very simple answer. When Labour was in Government it said that 30 hours a week was full time, according to Statistics New Zealand. During its 9 years in Government it said that 30 hours a week was appropriate for the Inland Revenue Department. It said that 30 hours a week was appropriate for Work and Income, with regard to people on sickness and invalids benefits. If Lynne Pillay cannot work out where the answer is, she has to answer the same question in all three of those other areas. We would be delighted to know whether it is Labour\u2019s policy that it now be 35 hours for the Inland Revenue Department, for Work and Income, and for Statistics New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269e7d3476d85403480f2198704bc95c5\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: No, because there\u2019s a difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abe5cf04b55c49a892a3d4e308c8fd5f\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, it is not. Well, then, I challenge Labour members to get on their feet and explain why one Government agency says to a person that 30 hours a week is full time but another says that actually, no, it is not. This Government is being quite consistent. I thought the last point was deeply ironic. Labour members challenged me for not having the courage to face up to a protest. I have to say to members that I think I have probably faced the biggest protest in Parliament. The last big one I really remember was the h\u012Bkoi. Do members remember it? I ask Lynne Pillay whether Helen Clark fronted for the h\u012Bkoi. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022800f9b55c2f44d2782d22b9ea530735f\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a88a39f34b444b48860decfde2e25c31\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: She did not. She did not, and Darren Hughes cannot rewrite history. They had a little gathering last week. Apparently the staff\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022151adbb27800428989706d9b9ec065cb\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: The H\u012Bkoi of Hope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295e1319995734293af80a5e25c259355\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The h\u012Bkoi about the foreshore and seabed. It was the biggest protest during Helen Clark\u2019s Government, and she did not front. They had a little protest last week. I asked my press secretary to look to see how many people were there. He came back to me and said there were more Labour caucus members than there were at the protest last week. It was a feeble effort, which all the journalists said was deeply disappointing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe last point I want to make is this: Darren Hughes made an interjection to say that when Maryan Street signed the books declaring a $2.4 billion loss for the 2007-08 year\u2014a full year in which she was the Minister for ACC\u2014it was just because of the loss of investments. Let me put the record straight. Of the $2.4 billion that was lost\u2014$2,400 million\u2014in the 2007-08 year, what portion of that was due to investment losses? Do members know what the answer is? It was $1 million. Out of the $2,400 million loss, $1 million was due to investments. Maryan Street has run round all the Labour caucus members and said: \u201CLook, it was not that bad, it was just the investment meltdown.\u201D That is not true. The truth is\u2014and Labour members need to reflect on this\u2014that Maryan Street\u2019s period of governance of the accident compensation scheme was reckless and irresponsible. If Labour ever proposes to put her in charge of any substantial organisation carrying taxpayer liabilities, it will in my view keep itself on the Opposition benches because of the cost fear that ordinary New Zealanders will have if she is ever put in charge again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022f0b1157791dc4e1793e034b81c85ed05\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f0b1157791dc4e1793e034b81c85ed05\u0022\u003EKEVIN HAGUE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The accident compensation scheme has over $10 billion in reserves and last year had an operating surplus of $1.5 billion. From where I stand, that does not sound like an organisation in financial crisis. The financial crisis exists only as a trick of accounting, an artefact of accounting. Probably all members of this House recognise that if we were to change the way that the scheme is funded, away from this full pre-funding model back to the \u201Cpay as you go\u201D model, the crisis would disappear overnight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EI thank Michael Woodhouse for providing earlier this evening the long list of trade unions that came to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and supported exactly the position of the Green Party, which supports a move away from full pre-funding and back to \u201Cpay as you go\u201D funding. To the list of organisations that Mr Woodhouse spoke about, I add the National Council of Women, the New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services, the ACC Futures Coalition, the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions, and, perhaps most importantly, the Retirement Policy and Research Centre. Economist Susan St John and accountant Michael Littlewood of the Retirement Policy and Research Centre have both provided very eloquently argued papers supporting the case for returning to \u201Cpay as you go\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EI have listened with interest to the debate at all stages of the passage of this Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. Tonight in particular I have listened for the arguments against that, for the arguments in favour of retaining full funding as the mechanism for funding the scheme, and I have to say that I have not heard any. In the more general debate in public I have heard three. I have heard members from the Government benches talk about the need to be fair to future generations. That is an interesting and wry argument for the Government to mount, because typically it is the Green Party that is saying that we need to be thinking about the long-term future, and that we need to be thinking about the legacy we are leaving for our kids and for their grandkids. In no area of Government policy have we been able to make any headway at all on that front.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EFunding the accident compensation scheme is the single area of Government policy and activity where the Government has said: \u201CActually, we really need to make sure that we bear the costs of this, not future generations.\u201D But when the Green Party argues for intergenerational equity, we are saying that we ought not to put off to future generations any cost or burden that will be exacerbated by that delay. By returning to \u201Cpay as you go\u201D funding, we would not further exacerbate that burden.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EEarlier this evening the Minister in the chair, the Minister for ACC, made the case that the position I had outlined on suicide was incompatible with the position in relation to health. Firstly, this Government funds health on a \u201Cpay as you go\u201D basis. The funds required to deal with health costs in the future will be the same as the funds required to deal with accident compensation and rehabilitation of injuries in the future. \u201CPay as you go\u201D funding of accident compensation is no greater burden than \u201Cpay as you go\u201D funding of health.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003ESecondly, Government members have talked about the bind New Zealand is in because of our requirement to comply with the New Zealand International Financial Reporting Standards, which are accounting standards\u2014in particular, to comply with standard 4. That standard imposes some requirements in relation to insurance schemes. In relation to commercial insurance schemes, there are sensible reasons for compliance with that code. But this is not a commercial insurance scheme. This scheme is not at risk of disappearing or collapsing, and therefore triggering those New Zealand International Financial Reporting Standards requirements. That is a false argument.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThirdly, the Minister has argued in several contexts that in order to prevent accidents, we require a full funding model.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u00221263ecd827df408f8abeeb771b4dbadb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221263ecd827df408f8abeeb771b4dbadb\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to go back and talk specifically about one of the provisions of this bill that I think is particularly troubling, for a whole range of reasons. It is the issue of the coverage of workplace hearing loss. This issue, I think, typifies what is wrong with this bill overall. The provision in Part 1 effectively provides that there will be no cover for hearing loss created in the workplace if it is less than 6 percent. A 6 percent threshold is being set in place by this Government. I think it is reasonable to ask the question: why the 6 percent threshold? There is actually no reason; there is no good reason. It is an arbitrary figure that the Government has chosen for cost containment reasons. Cost containment is the justification. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI will talk about some of these people with hearing loss in my contribution to the debate. This threshold will save us approximately $3 million to $4 million a year. That is right\u2014$3 million to $4 million a year. The consequences for the people who no longer have coverage as a result of this arbitrary threshold are substantial. I want to find out whether members opposite believe that that saving of $3 million to $4 million is worth it for the human cost that that will have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI note as an aside that the Minister in the chair, the Hon Dr Nick Smith, had quite a good go earlier at some of the people in the hearing loss industry. He said that members on this side of the Chamber were just listening to people who provide hearing aids, as if somehow those people had a vested interest. Actually, if the Minister had taken the time to listen to the very, very good submissions that were made on this particular provision, he would have discovered that in this area there has been major cooperation by the parties and substantial efforts made to reduce costs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EOne of the points made by one submitter was that we would be saving about $3 million to $4 million a year, but in fact the industry itself had saved something like $10 million over 18 months through its combined efforts and a cooperative approach. They were particularly galled by the fact that in the drafting of this bill no effort had been made to talk to anybody in the industry. We received submissions on this particular point from a whole range of people\u2014from people who suffer hearing loss, from academics who study the trends in workplace hearing loss, from people who provide hearing aids, from audiologists who test for hearing loss, and from unions whose members work in industries where workplace hearing loss was a significant issue, particularly in the past\u2014and I will come back to that point. That whole group of 46 submitters on this point\u201440 submitters opposed and six in favour\u2014came up with some very compelling points, I believe, and points that have not been taken into account at all by members on the other side of the Chamber. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWhat does this 6 percent hearing loss mean for people? The Government is trying to say that this is quite a trivial hearing loss\u2014less than 6 percent hearing loss is quite trivial. It is a small hearing loss. That is a bit like saying that someone is a little bit pregnant. So one is a little bit deaf. But it has real consequences for real people. I was very moved by one of the submitters who came to talk to the select committee. This submitter was an older man who had previously been a shearer. I know that members opposite probably do not give a toss about real people, but I will tell them about this real person. This real person worked in our primary industries, which are very significant to our economy, as a shearer. He took the time to come to our select committee to talk about hearing loss, because it was very significant to him. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EHe said that a hearing loss of up to 6 percent is not trivial. It means that one cannot hear things like birds singing and one\u2019s grandchildren talking. That is not trivial. Those are significant losses to real people. Hearing loss means real things to real people. It is a loss, and it is not trivial. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI want to talk about whom hearing loss affects. Who is affected by this issue? I am sorry if I am boring one of the members opposite, but this is important. This is something the Government is taking away from New Zealanders. It is taking away the right to have treatment for workplace hearing loss if it is less than 6 percent. It is not trivial. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWhom does hearing loss affect? It affects an older demographic. It is mainly older New Zealanders who have this sort of hearing loss who are coming forward nowadays, who are having their hearing tested, and who are then being fitted with hearing aids. They are older New Zealanders who have worked in noisy workplaces. They have been shearers, worked in factories or meat plants, or worked on the wharves. These people are not high-income earners. They are working-class people, if you like, and often older men. Overwhelmingly we see significant numbers of M\u0101ori and Pacific workers in those kinds of industries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe reason I am making the point that it is older New Zealanders who are affected is that this is one area where we have done some things right. Workplace hearing loss is not such a significant issue now because we can do something about it. It is perfectly preventable, and nowadays in most workplaces we can prevent workplace hearing loss. One of the academics who came to speak to the select committee pointed out that although there has been an increase in the number of hearing loss claims, this will not be a trend upwards. This is like a blip, and it should start trending down because we have a whole lot of older New Zealanders who worked in workplaces in times when we did not have hearing protection in place. We were not aware of the issues in the way that we are now. Those people will come through. I say to the Government, you are\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdb6a7b00dbf4a4e8cb0dd37c08776aa\u0022\u003EHon Simon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Not \u201Cyou\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022032f09ed82e24844aefee9a0573d905f\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, not the Chair but Ministers like Minister Power and others sitting across the Chamber are taking that away from older New Zealanders who have worked in some of our primary industries. They are working class people who have a chance to get treatment, a hearing aid, and their hearing restored so that they can hear their grandchildren speaking and the birds singing, and those are not trivial things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EAs I said, this is preventable. The implications of what the Government is doing here are unfair and discriminatory, a point that the Human Rights Commission made specifically to the select committee. This provision is discriminatory. Not only is it discriminatory, but the consequence of this is one that I do not think has had enough consideration, and that is that this provision restores the right to sue. Because people are taken out of coverage, the social contract is broken for those people, and the right to sue is restored. That is important. The accident compensation system has been a social contract in place all of my working life, and I have not had the right to sue for workplace injury, but I have had comprehensive cover under the scheme. That is changing here, and I urge members opposite, as I will be urging members of the public, to think about the implications of going back to a system where one had to sue to get some fairness. It is a serious matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI think it might be worth reminding members opposite of some more real examples, because I know how interested they were in the shearing example I gave them. Let me tell them about the 45-year-old building construction consultant with 4.7 percent hearing loss. He has a situation where he cannot hear well with background noise such as discussions at meetings or on the building site. Or I could tell them about the 56-year-old customs officer with 4.5 percent hearing loss, who works at the airport in a customs hall that is very noisy. He works with dogs and has to use a radio-telephone. He finds it difficult to hear at work when there is background noise. He attends training seminars but has difficulty hearing. His kids will not repeat what they are saying to him if he cannot hear it the first time, and a number of submitters talked about the implications between generations of hearing loss, and especially this low-level hearing loss. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u00222bd2cd01943f432ab7214c5bea244043\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222bd2cd01943f432ab7214c5bea244043\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I also want to talk about hearing loss. But before I do, I will touch on an aspect that Mr Hague raised in his call on operational surpluses. I point out that a $1 billion positive cash-flow does not constitute an operational surplus. If International Financial Reporting Standards were fully applied to accident compensation, the deficit that the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) would have to report would be much higher.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EWe have been talking at cross-purposes for the last several months on this issue, so I will share the benefit of my many years of experience as a chartered accountant with members across the other side of the Chamber. It goes like this: deficits, bad; big deficits, worse. When we have a $2.4 billion deficit, we are really starting to sweat. When we have a $4.8 billion deficit, action has to be taken, and that is what the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill is about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI want to talk about clause 6, because if there is any example of the duplicitous nature of the Labour Opposition, it is in relation to hearing loss. The fact that members opposite shed crocodile tears for the so-called claimants who will be denied treatment really is quite rich. I want\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb002a26dfb14cb6ab70d7e373a18cf2\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: Speak for yourself. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022757019b388564d5493a5d1a67a4172a4\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014to speak for myself and my own experience. At about the age of 6, my hearing loss was picked up in public health screening tests. Many years of treatment followed, including three surgeries: I had tonsil and adenoid surgery, a radical mastoidectomy, and eventually a muscle graft that closed the cavity in the ear. But I was left profoundly deaf in one ear. I was told by an ear, nose, and throat surgeon at that time that a hearing aid would not help me. I cannot recall the extent of the loss, but I am sure it exceeded 5 to 6 percent. Many activities have probably aggravated my hearing loss over the years, but, under the current law, if an ear, nose, and throat surgeon was able to attribute one bit of my hearing loss to industrial deafness, I would be covered. All of the non-accidental causes would not matter. The vast majority of my deafness is non-accident - related, but I would nevertheless be covered by the accident compensation scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EBut that is not the case, and the Labour Opposition knows that. Under the law as it stands now, the claimant is given cover but is denied entitlement to hearing aids. The previous Labour Government was prepared to tell claimants that, yes, they have cover, but, no, they will not be given a hearing aid. How big is this problem? It is not an isolated example. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3c4be4e793041478df630edbdf3cf63\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: Reconcile that with what the Minister just said a moment ago about the costs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff3e48cad087462394c4eadeeec770a3\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Shh, I say to the member; she will learn something. Officials told the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee that currently the proportion of hearing loss claimants who received cover but were refused hearing aids was 42 percent. So 42 percent of all claimants given cover are declined their hearing aid requests. My question to the officials was how much worse can it get. I asked what would happen if we were honest with claimants and set a 6 percent threshold. The answer was really interesting: not much. It was very hard for the officials to estimate, but the best estimate was that it would go up by about 4 percent. So we have this choice: set an expectation on the part of 42 percent of claimants that the Government, under the current legislation, cannot meet, or be honest with those claimants, tell them what is appropriate, and decline the claim.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EThis debate is as much about what is not covered as it is about what is covered. The idea of a financial constraint is too much for the Labour Opposition to handle. But this scheme is not a back door through which 42,000 elective surgery patients, callously thrown off district health board waiting lists by the previous Government, can somehow get their surgery; that is the role of Vote Health, and we are seeing very, very good gains in throughput at the moment. It is not about giving cover to people who are so depressed that they would attempt to take their own lives, or about the fact that Sir Owen Woodhouse said they should not get cover. They deserve our compassion and the best care that mental health services and Vote Health can give us. It is certainly not about ACC being the default health provider in this country. It is not a crapshoot for hearing-impaired claimants whose hearing loss is primarily not due to industrial accidents. We owe those people more honesty, and, for that reason, this hearing-impaired New Zealander strongly supports clause 6. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u002226c9252b52c9493c9b7e1c94e626d8c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002226c9252b52c9493c9b7e1c94e626d8c6\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to bring the debate on Part 1 back to the select committee process and to the number of submissions we heard. I think we heard about 46 or 49 submissions. I was on the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, and it was a privilege to hear from submitters. I appreciate the effort they made to come to the committee to make their submissions during a very hot January summer, because this Government was rushing the bill through and had a very short time frame in which to report back. So here we are in urgency: hello, what a change! I acknowledge those submitters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe majority of submitters were opposed to this bill, and I think it is very disappointing that the Government has not listened to the submissions. We see that in Part 1 where there have been almost no changes, just some minor technical changes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EPart 1 contains some very serious amendments to the current provisions, which New Zealanders have become used to having as part of their accident compensation scheme. For example, we see the removal of ministerial advisory panels. I find it incredibly arrogant that the Minister thinks he knows everything and does not need any independent advice about these issues, about gradual process and other diseases, about injury prevention, and so on. He says we should get rid of ministerial advisory panels because they might be inconvenient. As other members have mentioned, we are also seeing changes to vocational independence, which is really quite scary stuff. I heard the Minister responding to this issue and trying to argue that being deemed ready for work at 30 hours a week rather than 35 hours a week was somehow the same as other things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EWe are talking here about workers who have been injured on the job, most often through no fault of their own. After all, let us remember we are talking about a no-fault scheme. Part 1 contains a provision that when people are physically able to work 30 hours a week\u2014God knows what sort of job is being proposed for them\u2014rather than 35 hours a week as it used to be, they will lose their earnings-related compensation. That will cause hardship to more injured people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe next provision is a change to allow the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) to disregard pre-accident earnings. At the moment when ACC is assessing whether to deem someone as work-ready, it must have regard for the person\u2019s pre-accident earnings. The bill changes \u201Cmust\u201D to \u201Cmay\u201D, which means, of course, \u201Cmay not\u201D. We have heard descriptions from my colleagues about what that could mean for people, when it comes to deeming them to be work-ready and having to go back into some job that bears no relation to what they were doing before. How undignified is that! It is absolutely undignified. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThen I will talk a little bit about the risk rating provisions and what they mean. There is a real sense of fear around this, because we have seen it before under the past National Government where there were risk ratings and risk assessments. We saw that many, many workers were too afraid to put forward their injury claims, and some employers actively discouraged them from doing so because it would affect their risk rating. I do not accept that there are some people whose only motivation is money. That is what this provision means\u2014that the only motivation for preventing accidents and preventing injuries is money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThen, of course, we come to the 6 percent threshold for hearing loss that some of my colleagues have talked about. I think that for the members of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee this was one of the most poignant discussions in the committee. We heard from people who have hearing loss, and we heard from audiologists. The audiologists handed out earplugs to give select committee members a sense of what it is like to have a less than 6 percent hearing loss, and it is quite significant. I could not hear what they were saying without straining. As my colleague Carol Beaumont has said, someone described it as losing the ability to hear the birds sing, hear the grandchildren chatter, or being in a discussion with a group of people and being able to hear only the person next to one and not the conversation going on around one. It is quite significant. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EWhat is most disturbing about the hearing loss threshold is its arbitrary nature. Where did it come from? Why were the professionals not consulted? They were aggrieved about that, and there was a sense of dismay among the select committee members about that, too. Apart from the fact that the Government did not consult anybody, and the regulatory impact statement states that very clearly, the Government did not talk to the professionals about what this meant and did not listen to what the professionals said when they came to the select committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EWhen we talk about the 6 percent hearing loss threshold, we need to think about the thousands of workers in the workforce of the past who built New Zealand, who built the factories, who worked in the factories, and who did the jobs to build the New Zealand that we are all proud of today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280ebc1319bc0462c88ebdc1f2c07fe11\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: They looked after us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201ace33504a7455e99defe5befe37408\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, that is right. They were exposed to earlier industrial practices because they were acceptable then. Thank goodness we have moved on a little bit, although I feel very fearful about the lack of injury prevention provisions in this bill and the lack of an injury prevention focus from this Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe other issue the Minister has not addressed, and it has not been raised in this debate tonight, concerns the submitters who said the loss of cover for an up to 6 percent hearing loss opens up the right to sue. We have a 24-hour, no-fault compensation scheme, and the right to sue has not been part of it. I would be very, very interested in hearing the Minister\u2019s response to that. Will we see litigation opened up\u2014for the people who can afford it, because lots of people cannot afford to sue\u2014to the people who can afford to take their employer or whomever to court and argue that they should be compensated because they are not compensated under this scheme as they previously were? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EPart 1 is very, very important. There are other clauses in Part 2 that we will debate when the time comes. The select committee heard about some very significant changes in this part, and submitters came in their droves and in their numbers to oppose them. I find it very, very offensive to hear sniggering from members on the other side as the debate has progressed. That is offensive. When people come to this Parliament to put their point of view, Labour members expect them to be heard. Unfortunately, those people have not been heard at all, although the Government insists that this bill is all about saving the accident compensation scheme because it is in trouble, and about cost containment, and so on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EAccident compensation is about people. It is about people who are injured, either in the workplace or outside of the workplace. It is about people who get hurt, and who have grown up with the Woodhouse report and, since the implementation in the 1970s of a cross-party scheme, a no-fault, 24-hour compensation scheme. They have grown up to expect to pay their levies, and they expect better of this Parliament than we are seeing in this bill. There will be other things in Part 2 that we will want to comment on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI have one final question for the Minister, and I hope the Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister for ACC, Pansy Wong, can answer it. Earlier on we started talking about privatisation. One of the members opposite brought it up and said that members were looking forward to hearing some answers from the Minister. So I ask the Minister to tell Labour members whether it is the Government\u2019s intention to carry out privatisation\u2014in other words, to open up the work account to competition. Thank you, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u00220d1d5d0dcb4e44c88271276e22e35f6d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220d1d5d0dcb4e44c88271276e22e35f6d\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to take this call to look at a number of the provisions in Part 1 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. I believe that a significant number of these provisions are not only unfair but also discriminatory. These points were raised quite strongly by a number of submitters and by our Human Rights Commission, an organisation I have a great deal of confidence in. It seems not to have caused any concern across the Chamber. It has not led to any reconsideration of some of these provisions, but let me just comment on a few points. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EFirst of all, and I would be interested in the point of view of the Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister for ACC. The Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has a number of strategic priorities, and some of these directly relate to this question of fairness and not being discriminatory, which I believe a number of provisions in Part 1 are. Strategic priority one is \u201CEnsuring New Zealanders have confidence in ACC\u201D. That is ensuring all New Zealanders have confidence in ACC, not just some New Zealanders. Of course, those older New Zealanders with less than 6 percent hearing loss may not have such confidence in ACC any more after these provisions are put into place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EStrategic priority three is that ACC needs to be \u201CPeople-focused with good outcomes\u201D. I guess those people who are being considered as rehabilitated if they can go back to work for 30 hours a week as opposed to 35 may not feel that that is such a good outcome for them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThen strategic priority four is \u201COpen and fair access for all New Zealanders\u201D. I will go through some of the provisions in the bill and see how they stack up against those strategic priorities. Fairness is something that is valued very highly on this side of the Chamber. It does not seem to me that the inequality that some of the provisions in this bill put into place is at all worrying to the Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI am very glad that the M\u0101ori Party will be voting against this bill, because it is quite clear that these changes\u2014and this advice was given by Te Puni K\u014Dkiri\u2014are likely to have a disproportionate effect on M\u0101ori, as M\u0101ori are more likely to be employed in high-risk jobs, to be from low-income families, and to have higher rates of imprisonment. That is one of the inequities of the various provisions in Part 1. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThen there is the issue of gender. When the National Council of Women submitted to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, it was very scathing about the fact that no gender analysis was done at all of the proposed impact of those changes on women. It was quite clear that there would be a disproportionate impact on women. It made this point in its submission: \u201Cwomen are more vulnerable to negative outcomes through a lack of social services, and the stringent reductions set out in this Bill will reduce those services further. In addition, many of the service providers\u2014counsellors, physiotherapists, home care workers\u2014are women who depend on ACC funding to deliver their services.\u201D So there is a disproportionate impact on M\u0101ori and on women as a result of these changes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIn my earlier contribution, I also talked about the impact of the hearing loss threshold on older New Zealanders. For the reasons that I articulated before, the fact that we are now much better at protecting our hearing in the workplace means that fewer younger people with hearing loss will be coming through. It is an issue for people who have already been in the workplace and who have worked in very noisy industries. By nature, these are older New Zealanders. They are certainly being disproportionately impacted on by that provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThen, of course, there are the implications for younger New Zealanders who are specifically affected by one of the provisions in this bill, which I will come back to in a minute. This is very troubling. I do not know whether members opposite, other than perhaps members of the select committee, took the time to look at the submission of the Human Rights Commission. As I said at the start, it is an organisation that I know that everybody in this Chamber has confidence in. The Human Rights Commission talked about a number of provisions. It talked about the reduction of potential weekly earnings for young people to 80 percent of the minimum wage. It talked about the implications of reducing compensation for loss of potential earnings to 80 percent of the minimum wage in situations where young people under 18 have been incapacitated before they have been able to work or while they are in full-time study that commenced before they turned 18 and continued until they were injured. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EHaving analysed that provision, the commission stated: \u201CThe difficulty is that under the Bill people in this position will continue to receive 80% of the minimum wage for the entire time that they are in receipt of the benefit as there is no provision for this to increase after a certain time (as in the case, for example, with low income employees). As a precipitating factor is their age, this appears to be prima facie discrimination.\u201D That was one of the provisions the commission talked about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIt also talked about the reinstatement of the former approach for calculating long-term compensation for non-permanent employees. It noted: \u201CThe Regulatory Impact Statement admits that the effect of the change proposed in the bill will achieve a levy reduction of $13 million but that it will also reduce weekly compensation for some casual workers. To reduce compensation for seasonal and part-time workers is to effectively penalise one of the more vulnerable groups in society\u201D\u2014I repeat: it will effectively penalise one of the more vulnerable groups in society\u2014\u201Cand one that is most in need of state support through a period of injury and rehabilitation since they are least likely to have savings to fall back on.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIn other words, they are people with hardly any money who are working in a precarious sort of arrangement, who do not have savings, and who are being disadvantaged by these provisions. Certainly, the commission recommended the retention of the present formula. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIt also looked at the issue of increasing the threshold for hearing loss, which I have talked about quite a lot tonight. I will not go back over all of that, but I note that the commission stated: \u201CThere does not appear to be a percentage measure for any other form of personal injury. The Commission therefore considers that the requirement that a claimant has sustained 6% loss of hearing before being eligible for treatment amounts to intra-ground discrimination as it imposes different criteria for those claiming compensation for hearing damage as opposed to other forms of injury.\u201D There we are: there is another example from the Human Rights Commission. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe commission also talked about limiting compensation for self-inflicted injury and suicide. With regard to this provision, it concludes that again \u201Cit results in intra-ground discrimination between mental and physical injury and creates an extra hurdle for people with mental injury.\u201D Before it is too late, I would urge members opposite, if they have not already done so, to look at the Human Rights Commission\u2019s submission. It has gone into this in quite a lot of detail. It looked very closely at these provisions, and it has found a significant number of them to be discriminatory. I think we are duty-bound in this House to take note of that, and we are also duty-bound not to pass legislation that is discriminatory in the manner that the commission has noted. I would urge members opposite to look at that submission and see whether there is a chance that we can fix up those provisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI would also like to talk about a number of other provisions tonight. The first relates to changes to vocational independence, and this is where we are to substitute 30 hours for 35 hours. That will mean that a person\u2019s capacity to engage for 30 hours in work for which he or she is suited by reason of experience, education, or training, or any combination of those things, will be deemed to be rehabilitated and able to go back into the workforce and, therefore, will be ineligible for accident compensation. Where that is combined with the provision relating to no longer having to take into account people\u2019s pre-injury earnings it is a double whammy. It is a double whammy in the sense that one may be declared rehabilitated if one can work 30 hours a week, so one can earn only 30 hours\u2019 wages, and at a rate significantly less than previously\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00223e1c3edefc644cd880bccf842ab921e7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223e1c3edefc644cd880bccf842ab921e7\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E As is clear by now, the Labour Opposition strongly opposes this Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill, for very, very good reasons, as my colleagues have pointed out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI will talk principally about Supplementary Order Paper 111, which is an interesting number, considering that Dr Nick Smith is in charge of an emergency-style recovery in terms of the way he handles legislation going through the House. Members will recall that this bill started out with M\u0101ori Party support. That fell away, so the ACT Party was put in the ambulance of Nick Smith\u2019s bill. Its members said that they would support the bill\u2019s second reading provided only that all the privatisation measures come in at the Committee stage. Well, here we are at the Committee stage, and the bill goes much further than Labour wanted, but nowhere near as far as the ACT Party wanted. I can only imagine that all of this was happening in the December period, when there was a slight distraction in that particular caucus room.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ELabour members oppose this Supplementary Order Paper quite strongly, and I will come to the reasons for that in just a moment. Firstly, though, I will spend just 1 or 2 minutes rebutting some of the points that have been made in the Committee tonight by the Minister in charge of the bill, the Minister for ACC, particularly his comments about the financial viability of the accident compensation scheme. People listening to the debate tonight can ignore vast tracts of it, but they cannot ignore the fact that Nick Smith has played fast and loose with figures concerning the accident compensation scheme. He decided to declare the scheme near bankrupt. In what we were told by the Government was the worst recession in 80 years\u2014though that did not turn out to be right\u2014he looked at all the investments that the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) had made, and said that a terrible amount of money had been lost and therefore the whole scheme was busted. It was the same logic that the Government used on the New Zealand Superannuation Fund; it said that all the money was draining out of it, and that we would be borrowing to invest in a fund that was losing money. But as soon as the world economy recovered, the two parts of the Government accounts that recovered the fastest were the accident compensation scheme and the Government superannuation scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EOne of the difficulties politically for Labour in Government was that the Accident Compensation Corporation used to perform so well in terms of its investments that we would get big headlines saying there was a $10 billion surplus in any 1 year, as though that money was cash that was available to be spent in that year. In fact, it was from the corporation\u2019s investments. Government members have said tonight that the scheme is broke, but they fail to focus on whether its investments have recovered since the period that Government members have spoken of. I think some of the attacks made by Nick Smith were more a reflection on him than a statement of the facts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI also want to refer to what Mr Peachey said. I see that he is in the Chamber. I thought he would be busy reading the Ministry of Education website for data and information, just in case that call finally does come. I know that we have teased him, but I think that the call from the Prime Minister must be hours away rather than days away in regard to a particular portfolio in which I know he has a certain interest. Mr Peachey got stuck into us about our supposed love affair with criminals\u2014which I have never noticed before, but there we are. The Labour Party makes it very clear in its minority report that we do not believe there should be any compensation for people like Graeme Burton under the accident compensation scheme. We support the provisions in Part 1 that enable disentitlement of people like him. All that we are asking is whether somebody who is incarcerated for 1 week should lose all of his or her accident compensation entitlements, when a judge in a court of law has decided, based on all of the facts and none of the politics, that the crime was not worthy of the maximum 2-year penalty that that person could have been sentenced to. I must say that I watched the weekend news, and it is with a shudder that I see Graeme Burton, with all the evil crimes that he has committed, walking along on an artificial leg to stab somebody, with that artificial leg having been paid for by the taxpayer. None of us would support any support at all being given to somebody like that. Thankfully, in our country people like Graeme Burton are an extraordinary exception. Thousands of people pass through the criminal justice system every year. We should be tough on the worst offenders, but for those who have been sentenced to only 1 week, I think it is hard to argue this particular course of action.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI want to comment on new clause 22 on Supplementary Order Paper 111. It is about the rate of levies. There is particular reference in the amendment to the fate of motorcyclists. Nick Smith talked about the number of motorcyclists who have turned up at Parliament, and last year there were thousands and thousands of them. They were all pretty decent, hard-working Kiwis who were desperately concerned about the way that they were being treated. The Committee has not had a chance to consider their circumstances. For example, if we consider the vast increase in the number of motorcyclists on our roads in the last few years, we find that the actual rate of motorcycle accidents has been going down. One would not think that from the comments made by the Minister, because he took the raw number of motorcycle accidents. It is like saying that compared with the road toll in the 1960s, there are many more accidents now, so things must be much, much worse now\u2014without taking into account the increased number of cars on the road at this time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EAs we know, one of the great things from humanity\u2019s point of view, but one of the more challenging things from the point of view of ACC, is that many more people survive accidents now than used to be the case. That is a wonderful, wonderful thing, but it makes for a challenge from an accident compensation perspective, because very intensive and expensive care is required. None of us would complain about that at all. In fact, we welcome it. We think it is a great thing that Kiwis now survive accidents that they previously did not survive, but there is no question that that has an impact on the ability to run a no-fault scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWhere the rubber hits the road in a literal sense for motorcyclists is that they have been demonised by the Government in its advancement of Part 1 in this debate. In fact, the new clause 22 refers to the motorcycle safety levy, which the Government wants to set up. I want to know from the Minister in the chair, Pansy Wong, who from an Opposition perspective is one of the most excellent Ministers at answering questions in the House, whether\u2014[Interruption] She puts the Attorney-General to shame in that respect! I want to know from Mrs Wong, if she would deign to address us, how much of the levy will be spent on motorcycle safety, given that only $130,000 is being spent on it right now. How much does she believe will be raised from the motorcycle safety levy, and where does she think that money will be deployed? I think that is quite important, given how little of the debate tonight has been on the plight of motorcyclists. That is what a large amount of the public concern has been about. I ask the Associate Minister, Pansy Wong, to tear herself away from her no doubt crucial briefing papers on whatever matter it might be in order to tell us whether there will be a massive increase in the amount of money spent by the corporation on motorcycle safety. The levy is referred to in new clause 22 but we are none the wiser about how much of it will be spent on that particular topic.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI would also like the Associate Minister to answer for us why the levies on motorcyclists have increased so markedly when the scheme has a no-fault principle. I do not think that has been sufficiently explained. We talk the language of it being a no-fault scheme, yet that does not seem to be the case in relation to motorcyclists, who enjoy New Zealand roads and enjoy being outside, and who in my opinion are often among the safest people on the roads. Normally, motorcyclists are not at fault in respect of crashes and accidents that they are involved in. I think that speaks volumes for their commitment to road safety, yet the levies do not reflect that. Maybe Pansy Wong would be able to tell us about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI wonder whether she could also tell us whether new clause 22 takes into account that some bikes that have bigger engines are older bikes, and therefore are not capable of the kinds of speeds that some of the smaller engines are now capable of. Why is there a disparity in the way that those levies are charged? I think there are some equity issues there for motorcyclists.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThe other point that I think has been overlooked by the Government in this respect\u2014and new clause 22 goes some way to deal with it, but not as far as we would like\u2014is that some motorcyclists own many bikes but are not riding all of them on the road at the one time. There is no real way for the Government to take account of that. I can see by the Associate Minister\u2019s intense interest in the questions I am posing to her that either this matter was the topic of her PhD at university, or I am not making my points clearly and succinctly enough to elicit an answer. But knowing her respect for the parliamentary process, and the deft and elegant way in which she answers members\u2019 questions, I am sure a detailed answer is being prepared by her at the present time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThose are the issues for Labour members around motorcyclists. We believe that an injustice takes place in Part 1 that has not been addressed by the Government, despite the very constructive way in which the motorcyclist community around New Zealand has put its arguments. Phil Goff has done very well in trying to put those arguments. He has been meeting with motorcyclists and trying to articulate their concerns in Parliament, but so far there has been no joy from the Government. I hope Pansy Wong will answer those questions. I know that she is interested in them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022 data-id=\u0022ecb12b6f5df84665b647fc11e9815ab3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ecb12b6f5df84665b647fc11e9815ab3\u0022\u003EDAVID GARRETT (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak on Part 1 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill in order to correct some misinformation that has been promulgated by Mr Darren Hughes. For those of us in the Chamber who are old enough to remember, Mr Hughes appears to be the Peter Thornton of the Labour Party, the troubleshooter who comes to fix things up. Maryan Street knows what I am talking about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003EMr Parker talked about the inhumanity of National in suggesting that when the tyrant, the fiend, Graeme Burton rejoins society, to deny him a $10,000 titanium leg will somehow make the National Party and, by inference, the ACT Party inhumane and lacking in compassion. Let me tell Mr Parker this: Graeme Burton is a psychotic killer. If Mr Parker were on Earth instead of Mars he would know that he will never be released, ever. He knows that. Darren Hughes is nodding. He knows it, too. He has tried to say that you did not mean what you said, but you did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8e794396bc04bc68d05bbe09f481484\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: I did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281f42f33e61d4d13b06dd5f9395f56f8\u0022\u003EDAVID GARRETT\u003C/span\u003E: You said that we are\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a646910b80b64eb3b65a08de428bd413\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The member cannot bring the Chairperson into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2a48046cb3f4c5680772d04182b666f\u0022\u003EDAVID GARRETT\u003C/span\u003E: My apologies, Mr Chairperson. The member is being disingenuous\u2014or \u201Cdisingenius\u201D as Jacinda Ardern has put it\u2014in claiming that members on this side of the House are lacking in compassion. Graeme Burton is entitled to food, medical treatment, not to be tortured, and not much else. He is certainly not entitled to a $10,000 titanium leg. Every such leg given to somebody like Graeme Burton means that somebody else does not receive the benefit of the scare resources of accident compensation. Mr Hughes\u2014and you can look uncomfortable, Mr Parker; I am sure you will\u2014can come down here and act as Peter Thornton as much as he wishes, but you said it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd196b33db304af591448ead8fb9278e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: This the second time\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec36c174049443a5b19e8b3bc0cd7532\u0022\u003EDAVID GARRETT\u003C/span\u003E: The member said it, Mr Chairperson. My apologies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022daea1daa5ec04181ae887865b025054f\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: And I stand by it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222988658b401d41e49c4d624699d67542\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I am on my feet. The member cannot bring the Chair into the debate. He cannot say \u201Cyou\u201D. I ask him to please respect that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c11c54a7934445ab8d9993dc462753d\u0022\u003EDAVID GARRETT\u003C/span\u003E: I was carried away with passion rather than with compassion. Yes, that member did say that. I would like the 152 people listening to this debate to note that the member stands by his statement that to deny Graeme Burton a $10,000 titanium leg is lacking in compassion. Well, I do not believe that is the case. Those resources are scarce. We all agree that accident compensation needs to be given to people who need it, not to criminals escaping from jail, not to Graeme Burton to enable him to kill somebody else. He will try again, I say to Mr Parker. If you are too stupid to realise that you should not be here\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228cd39fb7433749009cb6e371e2848b1e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: That is the third time that the member\u2014[Interruption]. This is a debate on Part 1. To refer to another matter by way of reference like you have been doing, is fine but your whole speech cannot be on that subject. We are talking about Part 1 and we are nearing the end of the debate on it. I ask the member to confine his comments\u2014with reference; that is fine\u2014to Part 1. And I say for the third time that the member cannot bring the Chair into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7b80fdb0f1a4270aa4ed90fade851f5\u0022\u003EHon Simon Power\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Having been in the Chamber now for three-quarters of an hour and having listened to contributions from both sides of the Chamber, I think it is fair to say that Mr Garrett brings a certain forthright style to the debate in the Committee of the whole House. But his use of the word \u201Cyou\u201D has been no less or more regular than that of Carol Beaumont during her contribution. I ask that when members opposite are making a similar contribution and using a similar inappropriate word, a similar standard is applied. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2654530806e40d8b6e59da36e7d57eb\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for those comments. I have sat here for some hours now and I will judge the quality of the debate. I know that the member is exuberant and passionate about what he is saying, but on three occasions in a row I have mentioned and brought to his attention his use of \u201Cyou\u201D. The member has 2 minutes remaining. I invite David Garrett to continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f974b2eceb8945f9b79b47eebc3426ae\u0022\u003EDAVID GARRETT\u003C/span\u003E: It is not my habit to use up time needlessly. I think I have made my point. The scarce resources of the accident compensation system should be applied to people who need and deserve them, and Graeme Burton and other criminals do not fall within that class. I think Mr Parker will be haunted by his statement that he stands by what he said earlier, despite attempts by the troubleshooter to ameliorate what he said. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u002243ba8f34af234ff5960efcbda495c2c7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002243ba8f34af234ff5960efcbda495c2c7\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I do indeed stand by my comments. I agree there is a question as to whether it should be a $10,000 titanium leg or some other leg, but I certainly stand by my comment that we ought not to throw away criminals and not give them appropriate medical treatment. For me, to live in a society where someone has to walk around with just one limb because you are too miserable to see that we should live in a society\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223eaecca164c7464a8e35b3956d6bcd8c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I have just spent some time speaking to the previous speaker for mentioning the word \u201Cyou\u201D. The member knows quite clearly that he cannot bring the Chair into the debate. I will be on my feet each time it happens.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022085ce62b2db34e8ab02ffaf543796665\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: And so you should be. I apologise for that reference. The courts already have the ability to say that someone should not get accident compensation entitlement. It is wrong to say that just because someone has been in prison, he or she should get no entitlement. Labour members are on record as saying that Graeme Burton should not get any compensation relating to income or disability, but I still stand by the comment that he should be entitled to a prosthetic leg, as anyone else should be in this society. It goes too far if we treat criminals so harshly that they do not get that form of medical treatment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI will respond to one of the other issues that Dr Nick Smith raised in response to an earlier point. He said that I had pointed out that, on a cost comparison basis, the cost of New Zealand\u2019s accident compensation scheme was a lot lower than Australia\u2019s. He then said that I did not talk about the non-earners account or the earners account. That is quite true; I did not talk about those matters, because the select committee was not presented with any cost comparisons. For the Minister to criticise the Opposition for not providing information that the Government should be providing before it cuts entitlements to non-earners and earners seems to me to have it the wrong way round. It is the duty of the Government to show that those current entitlements are unaffordable. The only information we were able to ascertain was that in respect of the employers\u2019 account the cost is already substantially cheaper than the equivalent cost in Australia. In respect of administrative costs, we also have good evidence that they are lower than comparable costs in Australia. Given that that was the only information we had on costs, it seems to me somewhat ironic that the Minister was criticising the Opposition for not providing the information that he refused, or was unable, to provide to the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI would like to make a reference to some of the statements that have been made about risk assessment and risk-weighted premiums for employers\u2014or experience-rating, as it is called. We already have some self insurers in New Zealand, who are major employers. Officials were unable to provide us with any evidence that the groups that are self-insured and are fully exposed to their own risk had better rehabilitation or accident prevention rates than those provided by the accident compensation scheme elsewhere. So I cannot see how there can be such confidence that risk rating will reduce accident rates or improve rehabilitation rates. We were told that the research overseas goes both ways; the outcomes of it are unclear, and research has yet to be done in New Zealand. The cart seems to have been put before the horse. I would have thought that that research should be done before such a change is made, rather than after it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003ELastly, I will refer to the effect of the proposal that the Accident Compensation Corporation ignore pre-accident earnings when deciding whether somebody is properly rehabilitated. The proposal concerns not only earnings-related compensation, which stops after a period of time, but also ongoing medical treatment that could improve a person\u2019s rehabilitation, and, therefore, that person\u2019s chances of getting closer to his or her pre-accident earnings. If anyone on the other side of the Chamber thinks that private insurers re-entering this market will not take advantage of that particular provision, I suggest that is rather naive. When employers contract out their insurance to a private insurer, they have no control of the claim after the claim is made. They have devolved that responsibility to the insurer under their contract of insurance. The insurer takes it over. The insurer will do what insurers do all round the world, which is to try to cut costs in order to offer competitive premiums and make a profit for themselves. I think those provisions will be very dangerous, particularly when the scheme is privatised. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022 data-id=\u002267148719240041fab75ca4c827599f25\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002267148719240041fab75ca4c827599f25\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS (Labour\u2014Rimutaka):\u003C/span\u003E I intend to take only a fairly brief call on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. I know that is not something I have managed in the past, but I will give it a go. I stand to say at this point that Labour supports the 24-hour, no-fault accident compensation scheme, which the National Government seems to be intent on undermining at every available opportunity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EJust by way of introductory comment, I say that late last year I had the opportunity to meet with some visiting US senators. They were here to look at our health system. When I asked them which two things about the New Zealand health system they were most interested in, they said those were the accident compensation scheme and Pharmac. Those were the two things that they were the most envious of, because they believed that if they had similar schemes to those in the United States, then much of the health debate that people have there would be mitigated. So it is very concerning to see some of the provisions in Part 1 of this bill, which to my mind undermine the very good accident compensation scheme that we have, without a clear case having been made to support them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EThere appears to be very little evidence here, and the National Government instead appears to be undermining the scheme so that it can get away with doing what it has wanted to do all along, which is to introduce privatisation into the scheme to a much greater extent than currently. It seems to me that National is relying on the old Roger Douglas theory of never wasting a good crisis, and if there is not a good crisis, then simply trying to create one. From listening to the Minister for ACC, Nick Smith, speak earlier, one would think that all of the problems with regard to accident compensation relate to a massive increase in the scope of the scheme under the previous Labour Government. In fact, only 6 percent of the increase in liabilities, I have been advised, results from the increase in the scope of the scheme under the previous Labour Government. So Nick Smith\u2019s claim that the scheme was somehow left completely high and dry by the previous Labour Government because of a massive blowout in its scope is simply untrue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EAs Darren Hughes pointed out, Nick Smith appears to be arguing the same logic for cutting into accident compensation as the National Government has used for cutting into the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. He argues that because the investments that the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has been able to make on the international market have gone down in value in the recession, somehow that means we should make savage cuts into the scheme. Of course, the New Zealand Superannuation Fund has rebounded significantly during that time. I am sure that ACC will have made back a significant amount of the losses it made, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI also note at this point that Labour supports the extension of the date for the full funding of historic claims, but we oppose the bill overall. If the National Government was really interested in, and really supportive of, extending the date for the full funding of historic claims, it would have supported the bill that Labour has had in the ballot since the last election. In fact, David Parker sought leave last year to introduce that bill, and the National Government blocked that. So if it wanted to extend that date, there was already a bill there. It chose instead not to do that and to come up with its own bill, which it is using as a vehicle with which to push through a number of other changes that are detrimental to the scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI will talk about the cost of accident compensation, because many of the changes that the Government is proposing are being put forward on the basis that they will lower the cost, particularly for employers. When we look at the evidence of how the scheme stacks up internationally, we see there is not a great deal to support the notion that employers in New Zealand are paying a particularly high cost. In fact, Treasury advice to the Government stated that it is not clear that accident compensation costs are excessive. I refer to the minority view of my Labour colleagues on the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. They noted: \u201CAt the request of the committee, officials provided advice comparing New Zealand levies for employers to premiums in Australia.\u201D The advice showed that \u201CACC costs for New Zealand employers are substantially lower than the costs paid by Australian employers.\u201D I could be mistaken here, but this could be one of the National Government\u2019s key initiatives to catch up with Australia. It wants to catch up with Australia by making our employers pay the much higher accident-related levies that employers pay in Australia. I think National members have abandoned the idea of catching up with Australian incomes, so perhaps they are now going to console themselves by increasing the levies paid under the scheme by our employers, instead. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022 data-id=\u0022649c14a926b545868e32d61415376f95\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022649c14a926b545868e32d61415376f95\u0022\u003ECLARE CURRAN (Labour\u2014Dunedin South):\u003C/span\u003E I will take a call on this bill to express my disgust and disappointment with the Government. I felt sick tonight sitting here in the Chamber listening to some of the comments from the other side, especially from the ACT member David Garrett. Would it not be good to be standing here tonight talking about legislation that is actually going to make things better, not worse, for New Zealanders? I am proud of our accident compensation system. It is not broke; it has $11 billion in reserve. But we have had countless spurious attacks on its robustness and its credibility, in the name, ultimately, of privatisation. New Zealanders will get less cover and pay more, and it is unfair. Members have heard tonight countless times from members on this side of the Chamber how inhumane and lacking in compassion it is. We have heard lots of passion from the other side of the House, but no compassion. It is unfair for the vast numbers of New Zealanders\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268c79c9c0d5d41178756688860c6ab35\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: Put it on the record: you\u2019re compassionate about Graeme Burton.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f2c89e511d52496a89804c915f80dd6a\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I am sorry to interrupt my colleague during her speech, but the ACT member, despite his closeness to the Minister of Justice, should not have moved to the National front bench to interject on my colleague, when he belongs a bit further back, in the scheme of things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd0509788b5f4c94899dd0031a08d083\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: That is a fair point. I think the member, by shifting to his own seat with his drink, has taken that on board. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022341590f407674bfe998ce043373c2f5f\u0022\u003ECLARE CURRAN\u003C/span\u003E: I am talking tonight about the vast numbers of New Zealanders who will be disadvantaged by this legislation, this cruel and inhumane legislation that lacks compassion. It is hostile to decent people, who expect more from their Government. As members have heard countless times from this side of the Chamber, this bill will make our accident compensation system worse, not better. It will shift more of the costs of being injured on to the injured person and the State, thus eroding the protection of New Zealanders who are injured at work, despite the costs of accident compensation to employers already being substantially lower than those paid by Australian employers, as members have just heard my colleague Chris Hipkins talk about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EThe case for cuts to entitlements is not made out, and members on the Labour side of this Chamber believe that the recent increase in the liabilities of the scheme are being used by the Government as an excuse for unjustified cuts to the accident compensation scheme, and ultimately for its privatisation. Most costs saved by the corporation will not go away; they will be passed on to the health system, to the injured and their families, and to other State agencies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EI would like to reflect on something I heard my fellow Dunedin MP, a list member for Dunedin, Michael Woodhouse, talking about authoritatively as an accountant. I have to say that I was very disappointed in hearing what he had to say tonight, and I say to him that ultimately he will be accountable on that, in Dunedin particularly. Countless New Zealanders have relied on accident compensation to re-enter the workforce; it is part of the fabric of our society. It works, yet this Government is eroding and destroying it. Michael Woodhouse, who is a new member, as I am, in this Parliament, will be accountable on this, and I wonder how many of the Dunedin constituents who might be listening to this debate tonight, at 10 to 10 at night, will be wondering what on earth is happening to this country: waterside workers, railway workers, labourers\u2014people who do hard manual labour and who have accidents, and who are the backbone of the New Zealand workforce. I wonder what they are thinking tonight when they are listening to this debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EI will address Part 1 and talk about the issue about being deemed ready to work at 30 hours a week rather than 35 hours a week. Labour members do not believe that that cut is justified. Most full-time workers work more than 35 hours a week, and most need income based on those hours to meet their living costs. Deeming an injured person vocationally independent when he or she is physically able to work 30 hours a week\u2014which could trigger an end to earnings-related compensation\u2014rather than 35 hours a week, is unfair and will cause hardship to more injured people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EThe current rules, as the Labour minority report says, are strict, and deeming people to be ready to work does not mean that they can get a job. As the minority report by Labour refers to, there has been a study by Hazel Armstrong, published in the New Zealand Law Review, that showed that under the current rules only 32 percent of the long-term injured deemed work-ready were in full-time work. Twenty-one percent were in part-time work, 22.5 percent were on a Work and Income New Zealand benefit, 10 percent were not working but were not on a benefit, and 9 percent remained on a weekly compensation payment. The author, Hazel Armstrong, said that those figures demonstrated her point, that high exit rates are not the same as high return to work rates. That has implications for the State, because many workers put through the process do not return to work but are simply shifted from weekly compensation to Work and Income benefits. So the change to make this rule even tougher will reduce employer levies, which are already lower than overseas, but will do so at the cost of both the injured person and the State. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EWe have heard countless examples tonight that this bill will make things harder and will leave the vast majority of New Zealanders worse off, not better. As I said at the beginning, this bill is very disappointing. I have listened tonight to the debate from the other side of the Chamber with some disgust. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to Part 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002230643cb89de941a58c5a8e237d84bf70\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002247ca5c9ad1cf43369f93380f3e1e6cbe\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022db48e4d3892a4119bc89524e141a2406\u0022\u003EPart 2  Miscellaneous provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cef0084591ab455494acf803054f5445\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a debate on clauses 45 to 59, and schedule 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u00226503855808ff4d0782caace153b8f6d6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226503855808ff4d0782caace153b8f6d6\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E In this first call on Part 2 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill, I would like to address one of the changes that is made, in terms of the proposed deductions to earnings-related compensation. The bill proposes that where someone has holiday pay due at the time of his or her accident, that holiday pay is to be deducted from the earnings-related compensation paid to that person. Treasury, in one of the briefing papers that it gave to the Government in respect of this provision, pointed out that this particular provision does not save much money, and, more important, that Treasury was concerned about the principle. What this provision says is that people should have deduced from their post-accident earnings\u2014earnings in the form of earnings-related compensation\u2014their pre-accident earnings. Holiday pay that has accrued as at the date of an accident is due to employees as a consequence of their pre-accident earnings. It is an asset that is then theirs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EIf we think about how this change applies in practice, we can see the inequity of it because of the arbitrary and inconsistent way in which it applies. If an employee was entitled to 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave and had taken that annual leave just prior to having an accident, that employee would have no accrued holiday pay and therefore no deduction would be made from his or her earnings-related compensation. However, if an employee was soon to take his or her holiday, but had not yet taken it before suffering from an accident, the accrued holiday earnings would be deducted from the claimant\u2019s earnings-related compensation in that case. That was the concern that Treasury noted. It said the principle of the accident compensation scheme is that people are compensated for their lost earnings, and there is no policy justification for deducting accrued holiday pay. Indeed, as I think I have illustrated, the effects of doing that are arbitrary and therefore unfair as between earners. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EAgain, I return to the underlying justification that the Government has used in support of these changes, which is one of the affordability of the scheme. I remind the Minister for ACC that the only information that we had as to cost comparisons between the New Zealand scheme and overseas schemes showed that the New Zealand costs for employers were considerably lower per $100 of earnings than those paid by Australian employees per $100 dollars of Australian workers\u2019 earnings. We know that the administrative costs of the scheme in New Zealand are lower than Australia\u2019s. We know that the cost of employer levies in New Zealand is considerably lower, and there is no justification for what I think is an inappropriate change to the scheme, which effectively takes from the injured employee pre-accident earnings in respect of his or her post-accident needs. It is just bad policy. It is wrong. It is not justified on a cost basis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EIn the debate on Part 1 the Minister criticised the Opposition for not referring to costs in the non-earners account and in the earners account, which are another two accident compensation accounts. My response to that is that of course the Opposition does not have that information. It was not provided to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee by the Government, so how we can be criticised for not referring to what the Government ought to have provided beats me. The best information that we have is in respect of the costs of other parts of the scheme. That is that the costs of the New Zealand scheme are lower by a considerable margin than the equivalent costs in Australia and, I believe, lower than those of schemes in most other parts of the world. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00228f9157e32020480abbde339080b8d55b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228f9157e32020480abbde339080b8d55b\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The Committee\u2019s attention now moves to Part 2 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. There are many, many facts that the Opposition looks forward to regaling National with as we move into this debate, because this is an important part of the legislation. It sets out four or five separate areas that the Opposition looks forward to pursuing with the Government and the Minister in the chair in the morning, and we will not resile from the defence that Labour is making of the importance of making sure there is a 24-hour, 7-day-a-week, no-fault accident compensation scheme for the people of this country. That is what is at stake in this debate. It is what is at stake in Part 2. It is what will be at stake when we get to the debate on the title and commencement clauses, where it will become clear that the Government is changing the title of this law because it has no commitment to accident compensation in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Wednesday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20100223d87cc8833826406999878834bf28e3e8000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cbr\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227c7b6b307f7a43bda612211343ca20f1\u0022\u003ETuesday, 23 February 2010\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c7a18c41ba0b4ba8b2de6ffd120ad8d5\u0022\u003E(continued on Wednesday, 24 February 2010)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226c7f134001c64012851924b4ab54f55a\u0022\u003EInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002225866200eaa2464ca87bc041e9e0c5f5\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000005\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002267f0d9ab308c48bea394642ae0a6cf23\u0022\u003EPart 2  Miscellaneous provisions (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00229587f4fef3f74317b7f786b00595194b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229587f4fef3f74317b7f786b00595194b\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to have the opportunity to address the Committee, and, indeed, the nation this morning, on the very important matter before us, the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. When we began the debate on Part 2 last night, my friend and colleague the Hon David W Parker was busy outlining the direction Labour will be taking during this debate. We are strongly opposed to Part 2 of this bill, because it means a very simple thing for accident compensation: New Zealanders will be paying more and getting less. If members of Parliament in the Committee this morning vote to approve Part 2, they will ensure that Kiwis out there facing a rising cost of living and economic uncertainty will be paying more for accident compensation in New Zealand and getting less. We in the Labour Opposition do not believe that that is a fair deal for anybody, at all. That is what is at stake as we debate clauses 45 to 59 of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWe are very interested this morning to hear from the Associate Minister for ACC, Pansy Wong, who has taken over from Dr Nick Smith as the Minister in the chair, for a variety of reasons, no doubt. We are very keen to hear her views as to whether she contests the contention by Labour that people will be paying more and getting less as a result of the clauses that are in front of us. One of the areas I will look at first of all is the first clause of Part 2, clause 45, \u201CValidation of disclosure of information for assessment of levies\u201D. The issue of how levies are set has become hotly contested. People earning average amounts of money have faced an increase in their accident compensation levies. Of course, the small tax reduction they may have received last year was well offset by the increase in accident compensation levies. Those same workers on average incomes will face an increase in their GST to 15 percent this year, as well as further increases in accident compensation levies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWe want to hear a justification from the Minister in the chair of the way levies are being set in respect of clause 45. If we take one group of levy payers in our country, motorcyclists, we see that it is pretty clear that the disclosure of information for assessment of their levies has been subject to the grossest political manipulation by Nick Smith, Pansy Wong, and the National-led Government. They have run the line that motorcyclists in New Zealand are somehow an incredibly dangerous group of people who should be socked with massive, massive levies. The Government wants political congratulations for the fact that it reduced the proposed levy increase for motorcyclists from many, many hundreds of dollars to just several hundred dollars. The approach the Government is taking is inequitable and unfair, because it is not applying the same principles that it is socking the motorcyclists with to other groups in society.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI want the Minister in the chair to try to explain to us why that it is fair. If it is fair to misrepresent the effect that motorcyclists are having on our accident compensation scheme, why is she leaving other groups out of that assessment? The only assumption that members of the Committee can make this morning is that this bill is just one in a tranche of several bills, which can only lead us to ask who will be the next to pay unfair accident compensation levies when that disclosure of information for assessment of levies is made under clause 45. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWhat are the levies now paid by pedestrians and pushbike cyclists for their accident compensation? What level of assessed risk is taken into account for people in that category in the same way that the Minister is now doing for motorcyclists? I think that the Minister needs to come clean on those matters, because it seems to me that we are being asked to change accident compensation for one group of people, to move it away from the no-fault system, to make an assumption about the risk that they have on society, and to take into account no other factors. For example, Government Ministers have been going around claiming that motorcyclists are 16 times more likely to have an accident than other road users.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u0022c81029f00f694fbb99e173ac518e9860\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c81029f00f694fbb99e173ac518e9860\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to take a call on Part 2 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill, and this morning I will address two issues that are affected by this part. The first is around the abatement of holiday pay. We heard some very interesting comments from the Minister yesterday, and also in response to previous questions. He said workers who receive their holiday pay when they are on accident compensation are double-dipping. This provision is one of the most miserly provisions in the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224bc5b06e20724897a22b3f602915aaa1\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Disgraceful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd32b7b261814495aa7029e728c5e3e1\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: It is disgraceful. We are talking about pre-injury earnings, so we are talking about workers who have been working happily in their jobs\u2014not going to work to deliberately be injured, as the Minister has suggested in past comments. They are working happily in their jobs and accruing holiday pay, and in some cases they have not been able to take their holidays. They may be saving them up or may be thinking about taking a holiday with their family, and then they are injured on the job, through no fault of their own. They go on to earnings-related compensation. If those workers are then fired because it is a frustration of contract, or if they are made redundant for some other reason, they suddenly, because they have lost their jobs, have to use their accrued holiday pay. The earnings-related compensation stops, and they have to use their holiday pay before that compensation resumes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI think that provision is very mean. If workers are lucky enough to have used their holidays before being injured, this does not apply to them; they carry on receiving earnings-related compensation. How mean is this provision? This is such a mean and miserly provision. In fact, the Cabinet paper that recommended these and other changes says the estimated saving from this provision is $1 million. In the scope of the scheme, that is a tiny amount of money. Yes, it is a saving, but it will be paid for by the injured workers themselves. Treasury actually warned that the relatively small savings did not seem to justify the unfairness of this provision. It said \u201CClaimants may think it is unfair to have weekly compensation abated because of annual leave accrued while they were earning or accrued in a previous financial year but that was not paid until termination of employment.\u201D As I said, workers who have taken their holidays prior to being injured receive earnings-related compensation, but if they have not taken them\u2014because they were too busy or hard-working, or because they have not been able to agree with their employer on when they will have their holidays\u2014then that is just tough. They have to give up their holiday pay\u2014their very own money that they earned as holiday pay\u2014and have their earnings-related compensation suspended. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EWe spent quite a lot of time on this provision in the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee; it was very interesting to try to get clarification of it. The member opposite, Michael Woodhouse, insisted that when workers are on accident compensation they actually accrue holiday pay. In the end we all agreed that they accrue leave, and if they go back to work they actually get that leave. But I am here to tell the member that I have talked to all the unions about this, and a whole lot of wage claims are coming to employers, based on Michael Woodhouse\u2019s insistence that workers who have been on accident compensation should be accruing holiday pay. I have gone and told them to thank Michael Woodhouse and the National Party for that, and a whole lot of pay claims are coming their way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c0347e1b4f2482cbeae9dad4bdb50d1\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Did he make a mistake?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225856145eb38c47c09fd083db7050a7a3\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, he will not admit he has; that is the problem. He will never admit it. Right to the last minute at the select committee, he insisted that he was right. So I thank Michael Woodhouse. I have given the advice to the unions. They are taking it seriously and saying Michael Woodhouse thinks he knows what he is talking about, so they are off to do a whole lot of pay claims for all those workers on accident compensation who did not receive accrued holiday pay. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe other issue I will talk to this morning is the proposal to reduce the weekly compensation for seasonal and part-time workers. This is another miserable provision. It particularly affects workers who are women, M\u0101ori, Pasifika, and in low-paid jobs\u2014around half a million workers. These are workers in meatworks, fish processing, and a whole range of seasonal jobs. This provision will change the basis of the calculation of their pay back to the pre-2008 basis. It means that they will end up much, much worse off than they would be at present should they be injured in their jobs. As I said, this provision will significantly affect low-income workers, and it also exposes those workers to manifestly unjust compensation. They will end up not just on the minimum wage for earnings-related compensation, but in some cases on a heck of a lot less than that. It is very, very unfair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI will give an example of the negative impact of this change. A young mother who has been financially dependent on her partner for most of the year undertakes seasonal work for 20 hours per week and is severely injured during the fifth week on the job. Her $450-per-week earnings for the 4 weeks prior to her injury will be divided by 4 weeks initially, under new clause 36 (1) in schedule 1, and she will receive 80 percent of this or $360 for 4 weeks only, after the first week of incapacity due to the injury. For the rest of the time that she is incapacitated, her weekly compensation will be calculated by dividing the total amount of her income over her brief employment. Eighteen hundred dollars divided by 52 weeks is $27.70 a week. That will be the compensation for that worker. How on earth is that woman supposed to help her family to survive on that? It is a long way from real compensation, which, we should remember, is one of the Woodhouse principles that the National members say they support. It is a long way from real compensation for her severe work injury, and it is an unacceptable erosion of the social contract that underpins the scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EFurthermore, the process by which that worker is categorised as non-permanent is, to a large degree, very arbitrary. It requires the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) to essentially make a guess as to whether the employee would have continued to work for another 12 months. There is no way of knowing that. It assumes that seasonal workers go to work for 3 months. It does not take into account that many seasonal workers go from one job to another. It just assumes that they work for 3 months, and that is the end of it. It should go without saying that in many cases it cannot be foretold by ACC whether a worker would have continued to work after his or her seasonal job ended. Given the severe nature of the possible consequences of being a non-permanent employee under this bill, the test is fraught with uncertainty, and that is simply unacceptable. For these reasons we believe that this proposed amendment is absolutely unfair and should not proceed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe other whack that will happen for seasonal workers\u2014they get a double whammy\u2014is that they will go on to injury-related compensation and, because they are seasonal workers, they will be paid out their holiday pay. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca70b1fb618f434a9b012ebca08aa246\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re not on holiday. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022437ff7c2f7864b7d9ecd72329a4d147a\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: They are not on holiday; they are injured. But they will have to use their holiday pay. Their payments will stop. The $27.70 a week that the woman I have described might be entitled to will stop, and she will have to use the holiday pay that she has accrued in her seasonal job. That is incredibly unfair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6aa763b7af64bd583a88c37d4d7dca2\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Michael Woodhouse said that was all right, did he? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d74159522b054407ad00c85dc49cb55b\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and so did the Minister. He kept on saying that workers who are injured should not be better off when they are on earnings-related compensation. Well, I think I have demonstrated this morning that under this provision, workers will be significantly worse off. It is totally unfair that that woman should receive $27.70 a week. It is totally unreasonable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI do not accept the Minister\u2019s assertion that somehow these workers are gaming it. The implication of the Minister\u2019s comments is that workers are gaming the system and better off under the provisions that Labour introduced in 2008. We brought in those provisions in 2008 for casual and seasonal workers for the very reasons that I have described: because what was happening before was unfair. Again, I say that we are talking about the most vulnerable workers in our country. There are around about half a million of them, doing very important work and being paid the minimum wage. They are struggling along, trying to feed their families and to do the best they can, and hopefully trying to find another job in between. One group of workers who were brought to our attention in the select committee were school support staff. We know from the fair pay campaign late last year that these are very low-paid workers. They are affected by this provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227b3edb2f40d45289bc1d9bb6803c4e4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I call Lynne Pillay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d983efc598ce446fa2c15072054f5954\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: That was a very good speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u00222006fa2b80cb43e4948509d6e25466f1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222006fa2b80cb43e4948509d6e25466f1\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E That was a very good speech. I congratulate my colleague Darien Fenton on outlining very, very clearly some, and I say only some, of the major pitfalls and major claw-backs in the bill. When we negotiate in workplaces, \u201Cclaw-backs\u201D is what these clauses are commonly known as. If we look, we see that these are conditions and rights that the previous Labour Government reinstated to hold with the principle that the accident compensation scheme should be a no-fault system, a social contract when people are injured. All New Zealanders have felt very, very proud of that system. It has worked and it is not broken. I note that Pansy Wong, the Associate Minister for ACC, is the Minister in the chair. I have not heard Pansy Wong speak on this before and she should take a call. Nick Smith\u2019s contribution yesterday is probably why we are not hearing that contribution now. It was absolutely appalling. It was offensive to many people and certainly to all people on this side of the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI congratulate, obviously, the Labour Opposition, but also the Green Party, who have consistently opposed this bill on the basis that it is simply unfair. It simply takes away rights from New Zealanders and that is not the principle of what accident compensation is all about\u2014it is the absolute opposite. So I congratulate the Green Party but I challenge M\u0101ori Party members on this and tell them it is not too late to change their mind. It is inappropriate to support many of the clauses. I urge them to change their mind and to take a call\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5c0e0df57174fffbbaa906f9462b0a2\u0022\u003ETe Ururoa Flavell\u003C/span\u003E: We voted against it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f1e9383f6e64a72ba8dbb349141da6d\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: That is excellent, but the M\u0101ori Party supported sending the bill to the select committee, and if it had opposed it at that stage, perhaps the bill would not be back before the Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThe Minister has claimed that the accident compensation scheme is broke. I have talked about that claim before, but it is very important. How many times have we heard the Minister, Nick Smith, say \u201CACC is broke.\u201D? Well, it is not broke. It has $11 billion in reserves so how can it be broke? In fact, it is quite the opposite. If we look at independent advice, we see that PricewaterhouseCoopers from Australia found that the administration costs of the scheme are lower than for any other scheme. That confirmed previous assessments, and that is a very, very pertinent point. The accident compensation scheme has been criticised by the National Government but has been assessed independently as the most cost-effective in terms of administration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThat is simply because of the simplicity of the scheme. It is simply a no-fault structure. It covers injuries at work or elsewhere with a broad pool of levies coming in. I urge the Government to reconsider its position; accident compensation levies do not need to rise. The only reason the Opposition can perceive that levies would rise is that there is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9aedb5aa7d744aca5f9a23f3a3832c2\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: An agenda.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e2bc92eff2c4b8989b5bbc7282ef30a\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014an agenda. What could that agenda be under a National Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243945bdd8a444a66920c7427ae1feb62\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: Two guesses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295f4c1122c4a4b97acc8f0299c5263db\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: I do not think we need two guesses. I think we need only one guess, and that is privatisation. That is ultimately what will be at the end of this process. As I have said before, we saw absolute slashes to conditions in the accident compensation scheme under the former National Government. We saw the slashing of lump-sum payments. This bill is very much the same scenario. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI want to talk about hearing loss. I know that a number of my colleagues have spoken about it. In terms of hearing loss, the bill imposes a bar where people will get work-related\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227db07d2126814e4480632923a841ff09\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: It is all right to be a little bit injured.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231dc5ae439594019b170f16952b8de66\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly; as Ruth Dyson says, it is all right to be a little bit injured, and never mind what a medical professional says. We already have a bar in terms of age with regard to eligibility for hearing aids. I know that Labour members will attest that there were some very compelling submissions about hearing loss at the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. I ask whether I am correct on that, and Darien Fenton is nodding. If people have work-related hearing impairment through no fault of their own, and even though their quality of life is diminished with just a little bit of hearing loss, then this lousy Government is saying that funding accident compensation coverage for those people is unacceptable. It is saying that those people who have anything less than 6 percent hearing loss should foot the bill themselves. The principle is no-fault coverage for a work-related injury, but this Government is saying that if it is just a little bit of hearing loss, or what the Government perceives as being a little bit of hearing loss, regardless of what medical professionals and the Deaf Association say, then the Government does not have to fund accident compensation coverage for it. This Government says that it will make those injured people pay, even though the hearing loss has occurred through no fault of their own.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E What will this do, and what alternative do people in that situation have? Either they foot the bill, or they think that it simply is not fair and will look at whether they can sue their employer, in many cases. What is the principle behind accident compensation? If we go back to basic principles, it is a no-fault system. This change is absolutely silly. The amount that will be saved will be minimal, but this measure will also cause considerable stress, anxiety, and financial stress for people who have suffered a work-related injury. We are absolutely opposed to this change, as we are opposed to many of the other clauses. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EOne such clause is clause 53, which amends the work-related gradual process provisions. We know that this change will affect older people, but we are also hearing from many people at the moment\u2014and I think that many of my colleagues will confirm this\u2014who have been told that their claim is a gradual process injury. They are not getting any support from the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), so they have to go through this long process of going to a review and having to challenge ACC\u2019s decision. Many people go to a review, which, without support from ACC, obviously causes considerable financial strain. People also have to wait long periods of time for their review and to be able to see justice served. After going through that process, many of those people may also see the original decision upheld. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EBut the other thing that concerns me is the number of people who do not go through that process. People see that the stress and anxiety of all of this process is too hard and they just drop their claim. They just box on, not getting the financial support that they are probably entitled to. The cost-cutting agenda of ACC is nothing short of ruthless. I am pleased to see that the Minister of Labour is currently the Minister in the chair, because the next thing I want to talk about is holiday pay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022377790c8d14d4bb59148ae412e21bce9\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: She won\u2019t know about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227823ea7a9f7d4b749923ba6ef383960a\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Oh yes, people should use up their holiday pay. This Minister of Labour is not familiar with many, many issues to do with labour. I think that even she would accept that; I think I see her nodding. The situation is that holiday pay is not double-dipping. Holiday pay is a right that has been accrued by work. People have worked and they have accrued that right to holiday pay. I have news for the Minister and the Government: when people are injured, they are not on holiday. It is not a holiday. If the Government went out and spoke to injured people, it would see that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022 data-id=\u00227ac0ea7d54274195948f0b0c000bff84\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ac0ea7d54274195948f0b0c000bff84\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E We started this debate this morning with Darren Hughes asking the question about the fact that surely we are paying more and getting less with the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. I wonder why we are paying more. That surely is the question. Why are we paying more? I do not know how closely Darren Hughes has listened to this debate. It is pretty obvious that Lynne Pillay has not listened to this debate, because she criticised the M\u0101ori Party for supporting this bill, and the M\u0101ori Party made it very clear that it was not supporting the second reading. In fact, the M\u0101ori Party voted against the second reading and will not be voting for this bill. So Lynne Pillay has not been listening to this debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003ELet us now address the question that Darren Hughes asked. He said we are paying more and getting less. Well, why are we paying more? We had claims in 2005 totalling $2.2 billion. In the space of 4 years, the claims paid by the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) have gone from $2.2 billion to $3.6 billion, which is a 57 percent increase over 4 years. That is simply not sustainable. Darren Hughes may think that money comes from fresh air but if the claims keep increasing at 12 percent per annum indefinitely, of course we will pay more. Someone has got to pay. Lynne Pillay said that the accident compensation scheme is not broke, and that levies do not need to rise. Maybe we will get to a state where levies will not rise, but we certainly will not get to that state where levies do not rise if we keep paying claims that are increasing by 12 percent per annum. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EI believe that one of the major contributions to this debate was made by Maryan Street, when she said during the second reading that medical science has advanced so much since the accident compensation scheme was passed and brought into being in the early 1970s that people who would routinely have died as a result of accidents now live on. That is one of the major reasons that we have a blowout in accident compensation. It is not the only reason, but it is a contributing reason. People who would have died now live on, but they live on as paraplegics, as tetraplegics, and the cost of keeping those people alive can run into many hundreds of thousands of dollars, and even into many millions of dollars.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e019f36c72d4e33852b2966fe9f326e\u0022\u003EGrant Robertson\u003C/span\u003E: What is the member suggesting should happen to those people?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfa238afd58c4221b84b7a46958c78d2\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN\u003C/span\u003E: I will listen to Mr Robertson. What I am suggesting is those people should be allowed to live on\u2014absolutely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022edbeb9a2afaa44238dcce6a7e5e80ac7\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Phew. How very generous of you!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0903ab4d7f24d079ce384c51b5cb8a6\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN\u003C/span\u003E: It has to be paid for, I say to Ruth Dyson. My sister was involved in a fatal car accident 30 years ago and she lived for 53 hours. One of the hardest decisions my mother had to make was to allow her life support system to be turned off. She would not have had the quality of life that she could have had with medical science today. With the advances in medical science, if that accident had happened today, she might have been able to live on. My mother would have wanted her to live on. The wonderful thing about accident compensation is that the advances in medical science would have enabled her to live on, but it comes at a very significant cost. We need to address that issue. We have people living today who are tetraplegics and paraplegics and the cost of their living on is many millions of dollars. Life is precious. Life is absolutely precious, and if those people can live on with any semblance of a normal life we absolutely need to allow that to happen, and that is one of the beauties of medical science. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EBut we need to recognise that that has a huge impact on claims of accident compensation. That is one of the contributing reasons why we have calculated liabilities of accident compensation of some $23 billion. If a person has a fatal accident\u2014let us say, in 1995, which is 15 years ago\u2014and they become a tetraplegic, they can live on. But they require round-the-clock care, 24 hours a day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003ESo what happens is that there is a cost. An actuary can calculate the cost of a person living on from, say, the age of 25, for a further 40 years. It may come to $2 million, $3 million, $4 million, or $5 million. That actuarial calculation is done for all other claimants and I think the current valuation of ACC\u2019s liabilities is some $23 billion. Lynne Pillay\u2019s contribution to the debate was saying that because we have assets of $11 billion, ACC is not broke. Well, if the forecast costs of looking after and maintaining the life support systems that keep those people alive, supporting them, and giving them income are some $23 billion, ACC is currently running at a deficit of $12 billion. There is a cost. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EI find it very interesting that when it comes to superannuation, Labour criticised National\u2019s decision not to continue pre-funding New Zealand superannuation. We have a New Zealand Superannuation Fund of some $12 billion. I do not hear Labour saying that because we have $12 billion in reserve in the Superannuation Fund, we do not have to contribute\u2014no. In the case of ACC, it is exactly the same. We have assets of $11 billion, liabilities of $23 billion, and a $12 billion deficit. We need to wake up to the fact that in the time, going on 40 years, since accident compensation was adopted, there have been advances in medical science, and that is fantastic. It is fantastic that there have been advances in science so young people like my sister\u2014who was not able to live 30 years ago\u2014can live today and their families can have them around, but there has to be a cost. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EWe need to recognise that there have been substantial extensions to the accident compensation scheme. Clearly, the country cannot afford it. We cannot carry on indefinitely increasing claims by 12 percent per annum, year after year after year. This Government is trying to put a lid on that and recognise that claims have blown out. What do we do? We introduce competition, choice, and ways that we can reduce the number of injuries occurring. We need to improve rehabilitation rates. This is not a simple issue, but the Government has woken up to the reality that we cannot keep increasing claimants by 12 percent per annum, at fives times the rate of inflation, year after year. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u002254394053dad54f2c9f50c338ae55e166\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002254394053dad54f2c9f50c338ae55e166\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to respond to a couple of points that Mr Boscawen has just made in the previous speech, even though none of it bore much relation to Part 2 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. Mr Chair, I hope that you will allow me to provide some rebuttal, albeit a little tenuously connected to Part 2. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EFirst, I wish to register my sympathy and respect for the personal family story that Mr Boscawen told. Such stories touch us all, and the story goes to the heart of the accident compensation scheme. I thank the member for raising it, and I want to treat that story, that part of the member\u2019s own family history, with a deal of respect. It is true that near-fatal accidents and very serious injuries that may result in tetraplegia can cost the accident compensation scheme something in the order of $20 million over the lifetime of a person these days. Because our medical technology has improved substantially, because our support systems are better than they were 40 years ago, and because prices and costs have increased, yes, it is quite true that even one such accident a year can cause a $20 million liability to be loaded across the lifetime of that person. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EBut for my part, I would rather have such a system than not have it. I would not wish to see people compensated and supported at a time of a traumatic injury for one or two years only, or even perhaps for three years only. The reality of the situation is that we proceed with our busy and full lives, something happens, an injury is sustained, and people\u2019s lives are irrevocably changed. They are changed for life. I want to be part of a society that is compassionate enough to say we will support those people for the duration of their life because they are human beings and because we value them. I cannot put a price on anybody\u2019s life. I can say some people with extraordinary disabilities arising out of injury have been among the most inspirational people I have ever met, and to think that a Government, a State, a country, a society would choose not to support those people does not sit with my values and with the values of the Labour Party. That is the first point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI wish to turn to a couple of issues that come out of Part 2. I want to revisit clause 55, which my colleague Darien Fenton spoke about earlier, and which is to do with the calculation of weekly earnings for weekly compensation. I, too, am pleased that the Minister of Labour is in the chair at the moment, because I want to draw some facts to her attention. The Minister in charge of this bill, the Hon Nick Smith, comes from Nelson. In Nelson there is a lot of seasonal, casual, and part-time labour. It is a region that is fundamentally dependent on primary produce. Fortunately we produce it well. I live there also, so I know that we do it very well. But there is a lot of seasonal work. It is a good year for low-paid workers in Nelson if they can move from trimming the vines to picking the apples, and to harvesting the kiwifruit in succession. But quite often workers find that they can get work for, say, only 40 weeks out of 52. And let us not exaggerate the case and say it is 4 weeks out of 52; let us say it is nearly a year, but not quite. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe amendments in this legislation have compensation being calculated on the basis of a 52-week year rather than the number of weeks worked. Anybody can work out that if one divides earnings by 52 rather than by the number of weeks worked\u2014for example, 40\u2014one will get a much smaller figure. If we think about the principle of compensation, it has always, from the very beginning in the Woodhouse report, been set at 80 percent of income. The purpose of that is to prevent people from doing the very thing that the Minister in charge of this bill accuses people of doing; that is, earning more on compensation than they would do if they were in work. Receiving 80 percent of one\u2019s earnings is an incentive to get back to work. Receiving 80 percent of the household income is an incentive to get back to work. That is why that percentage was set; that is what it was designed to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EWhat we have in Nelson is not only the average hourly income being, the last time I looked at the figures, some $2 less than the average hourly income across the country\u2014and the Minister in charge of the bill should be aware of that\u2014but also a lot of seasonal work. So suddenly, to divide a 40-weeks-a-year income by 52, and then pay compensation at 80 percent of that, will cause hardship to already low-paid workers. The Minister of Labour, who is currently in the chair, needs to drive that home to her colleague the Minister for ACC, because for some reason he does not get it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe Minister for ACC persisted with yet another myth\u2014another of Nick\u2019s myths\u2014when he said people are likely to receive more through compensation than they would through their earnings. That is both untrue and nonsensical at the same time when people are working a short year and are on low rates of pay, if the system divides their earnings by 52 rather than 40 and then takes 80 percent of that. Hardship is suffered by some 76 percent of the families who live in Nelson. Some 76 percent of them did not benefit from tax cuts from this Government. They are low-income earners. Nelson is beautiful; it looks lovely when we drive in. I love it. It is a fantastic place to live. But let us not be fooled into thinking that the whole region is not sustained by the low wages that come out of primary production. This clause will create hardship. It is not fair. The nonsense that the Minister for ACC spouts about people receiving more while they are on compensation than they do when they are working is simply that: it is arrant nonsense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe next clause I wish to speak to is clause 53, and it is to do with work-related gradual process, disease, or infection claims. We have had some discussion about this clause in relation to hearing loss, in particular. I want to make a couple of points. One is that work-related gradual process injuries, if we take hearing loss as a particular example, have been monitored and have been subject to research and analysis for numbers of years. In fact, one of the advisory panels to the Minister is particularly engaged on this aspect of the accident compensation scheme. The hearing loss figures, as an example of a work-related gradual process injury, were actually in decline. They have been declining because most of the people who have been subjected to noisy work environments have become older and have been detected. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u00220139521a734b44978803506073f5c597\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220139521a734b44978803506073f5c597\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to take a call on Part 2 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. In particular, I want to concentrate on clause 58, \u201CAbatement of weekly compensation\u201D, because if there was ever an example of not letting the facts get in the way of a good rant, it was from the Labour members this morning. Actually, this is an extension of the irrational\u2014in fact, ill-informed\u2014rant that started in the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and is continuing today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EOne of the more disappointing aspects of this is that Labour members were prepared to sit by while submitter after submitter complained about things in the bill that just were not there. So what I want to do is take the members on the other side through a couple of pieces of legislation. I know that is difficult for some, because it involves reading the law, so I will go very slowly. It is quite appropriate, I think, that the Minister of Labour is in the chair at the moment, because it actually relates to the Holidays Act 2003. Who passed the Holidays Act? Oh, it was Labour. That is right. So for the benefit of the members on the other side who do not understand and have never employed staff, I am going to work very slowly through it. Under section 16 of the Holidays Act, every employee is entitled to 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave. That entitlement to annual leave accrues even though the employee\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c8d70b3e215401c9047c77b6ec153b4\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Everyone\u2019s wrong except Michael.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be79e9b4c0d447ca97ee03c0aa1f9515\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: See, is it not amazing how Labour members cannot listen and talk at the same time. They think they can, but they are actually listening with their mouths, not their ears. That really prevents a bit of learning. The entitlement to annual leave includes when people are on maternity leave, when they are on volunteers\u2019 leave, and when they are on weekly compensation. When the anniversary of their entitlement to that annual leave clicks over, that 4 weeks is banked. It is calculated on their ordinary earnings and is paid out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EWhen an employee\u2019s contract is terminated, the provisions of sections 23, 24, and 25 of the Holidays Act apply. I have to accept for the benefit of Darien Fenton, that she was correct; I misunderstood this aspect of the law. The officials clarified it for me. What is really interesting about this is that employers are actually paying out holiday pay at a level greater than their requirements under the Holidays Act specify. I know of a number of employers who pay that proportion out, notwithstanding the fact that they do not have to because the definition of gross earnings, as set out in the earlier definition in the Act, and which is applied in sections 23 to 25, does not include weekly compensation. So here is the thing: I will run through the scenario of a nurse who suffered a shoulder injury\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296af31b4efa546e9a7f279861f2c9fa6\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: All those wage claims mounting up!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221cdf6af5c0c4e2895977057c5c001ac\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Opposition members are trying to listen and talk at the same time. It took 2\u00BD years and about three surgeries before it was agreed reluctantly that that nurse would never return to active nursing again, and her contract of employment was terminated under the frustration provisions. She had, up until the time of her injury, accrued annual leave for her work. That is a concern of Mr Parker\u2019s, I know. She was on 80 percent weekly compensation, and used that annual leave to top up her earnings so that she was getting the same take-home pay as she would have if she had not been injured. Two years passed, and the entitlements to annual leave, in accordance with section 16 of the Holidays Act, clicked over, and she was validly entitled to those. That is what we are talking about in terms of the abatement provisions. We actually paid out the balance of the year for which she did not accrue annual leave prior to her termination. I now know that, under the law, we did not have to. Here is the point: if we do not pay it out, it cannot be abated. So that is a red herring, as well. What we are talking about, essentially, is annual leave accrued during the period of incapacity that is then paid out. All this bill does is simply say that we should not pay twice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224207a32b453a4ffea880f7894441756a\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: What about seasonal workers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022acba5b27f5f2464aaea400248658d605\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I will come to seasonal workers if I get a chance; I may not have time. Before the end of my speech, I will also quickly touch on the issue of it costing only $3 million or $4 million. The Opposition says that the hearing loss provisions and the Holidays Act issues cost only $3 million or $4 million. Let me tell members that the accident compensation scheme actuaries are provisioning over $1 billion in full-funding entitlements for hearing loss.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u002242a0d328ac4247d5a16ed88a803d6a50\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002242a0d328ac4247d5a16ed88a803d6a50\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E How very interesting that speech by Michael Woodhouse was. I will just go back to a couple of simple points in relation to holiday pay, because I think we should keep to the main point, here. The main point in relation to holiday pay in the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill is that it will, blatantly unfairly, provide that holiday pay accrued before the injury will be counted and abated against weekly compensation. When people have an accident, it is a random event. One cannot plan for it. One circumstance might be if a person has had the good fortune to go on a paid holiday with the holiday pay that he or she has accrued for the time worked prior to having an accident. Another circumstance might be that of a person who has accrued holiday pay and could have a paid holiday, but, unfortunately, has an accident prior to taking that paid holiday. It is as simple as that. I will not go into all the technical detail about other points around holiday pay, because I want us to focus on the real issue. The real issue is that this bill perpetrates a completely unfair outcome for workers. It is an attack on workers\u2019 rights, in fact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EAs other members have said, I am very glad that Kate Wilkinson, the Minister of Labour, who I am sure is listening intently to what I am saying about holiday pay, is the Minister in the chair. I ask the Minister to talk about this matter, and to explain it. I think it should be explained to the workers of this country why this provision is fair. Even Treasury, hardly the place where worker-friendly advice is forthcoming, points out that this will save only $1 million, but that in principle it is unfair. Let me say that again. Treasury says that in principle this provision is unfair. I would like the Minister to take a call and explain to us how she can justify a provision that saves $1 million\u2014a provision that even Treasury says is unfair\u2014and basically randomly affects workers, based on when they have an accident and whether they have previously taken a paid holiday. Two workers in the same workplace could find very different outcomes for themselves, because of this provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThere can be no justification for treating people differently. It is just a mean-spirited and unfair provision. I know that for some people in this Chamber, talking about whether things are fair or unfair is really a bit of a red herring. They do not like it. They think that is not really the point. But New Zealanders do care about fairness. I believe that most New Zealanders do not yet understand this provision. Certainly, members on this side of the Chamber will be making it crystal clear to people that this is what this bill does. Once people start to see this bill in action, I think the Government will hear significant concern being expressed to it, because of the blatant unfairness. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003ESubmitters on this particular provision certainly recognised that this was an erosion of workers\u2019 rights. A number of unions and the Council of Trade Unions explained pretty much what I have just said\u2014that holiday pay is earned at a time prior to the injury, which effectively means that this provision requires a worker to fund his or her own compensation for the period of the abatement. Some of the cost is therefore effectively being shifted to the worker. There are a number of provisions in this bill that do exactly that. It is about cost shifting. It is about cost shifting to workers; it is about cost shifting to families; and, it is about cost shifting to the health budget, rather than accident compensation. There are a range of cost-shifting provisions in this bill, and this is one of them, but it is a really mean, nasty, unfair little provision that shifts the cost back to a worker who unfortunately did not have the opportunity to take the paid holiday that he or she was due. Again, I urge the Minister to stand up and tell us how this can be right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003ELast night I made the point that a number of provisions in this bill are unfair. I have taken some considerable time this morning to explain in detail why I believe that one little provision around holiday pay is unfair. But let me say that the combined effect of this bill, including that provision, is a range of unfairness. It has a disproportionate impact on some groups in our society. Certainly Te Puni K\u014Dkiri has made it very clear that this bill has a disproportionate impact on M\u0101ori. Certainly it is clear, and submitters have acknowledged this, that it will have a disproportionate impact on women. Some of my colleagues have talked this morning about seasonal workers. I think they would find that any analysis of seasonal workers in this country will include significant numbers of M\u0101ori and significant numbers of women. That is just one particular example where we will see a disproportionate impact on particular groups of New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe hearing loss threshold, as I said previously, will have a disproportionate impact on older New Zealanders, and on New Zealanders who have worked in our primary industries and in manufacturing, where we have had decades of people working in very, very noisy workplaces. Fortunately we seem now to have got that one largely sorted out. The hearing loss threshold will impact mainly on older New Zealanders. Those are some reasons why this bill is unfair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EBut not only are the provisions of this bill unfair. Others have gone on to explicitly show that this bill is discriminatory in terms of our Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Commission made a very strong submission to our select committee, and I find it deeply troubling that no Government Minister who has been in that chair has taken the time to get up and tell us why we should not be concerned about the areas of discrimination identified by our Human Rights Commission. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIn this bill it talks, for example, about discrimination against young people. It talks, for example, about discrimination against older New Zealanders. It talks, for example, about discrimination against those with mental rather than physical injuries. These are very important points being made by the Human Rights Commission, whose job it is, among its many jobs, to inform us as members of Parliament about the potential disproportionate impacts and the discriminatory impacts of things we are doing here. I would really like somebody on the other side of the Chamber to do the decent thing and take a call on this, and explain to us why we should be relaxed about things that the Human Rights Commission are identifying as discriminatory. I do not think those members will be able to do it, because I think the Human Rights Commission is absolutely right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003ESo we have a bill before this House that is unfair and mean-spirited, some of the provisions of which, like the hearing loss one, are justified only as so-called cost containment. So despite the fact that the provisions are unfair and discriminate against certain New Zealanders, this is a $3 million to $4 million saving, and the holidays pay one is a $1 million saving. This is mean-spirited, unfair, discriminatory legislation, and it affects workers\u2019 rights. Of course, that is something, I am sure, that the Minister of Labour, who is the Minister in the chair, will want to talk to us about, and I am really looking forward to that. So far under her watch we have already seen the erosion of workers\u2019 rights in this country, and I am sure there are many more to come. We have seen the erosion of workers\u2019 rights in relation to the right to take a personal grievance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThis certainly leads me to be very nervous about the fact that there is more coming in this space, and the Minister has not ruled anything in or out, according to an interview I heard the other day. I would not be surprised if we found more New Zealanders losing their right to take a personal grievance, which I think will be something that, hopefully, will worry most fair-minded New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIn respect of workers\u2019 rights in this country, we have had very little effort by the Government to deal with issues around jobs, and that is a pretty important worker\u2019s right\u2014the right to a job. We have certainly seen low-paid workers being hammered, including, most recently, a 25 percent lift to the minimum wage being the response of this Minister to moving the minimum wage, which is the social floor, if you like\u2014the minimum we believe that people should work for. I urge the Minister to get up and talk to us about on this provision around holiday pay in the bill. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u00229c18c38e6b06421bafe134a1988aa594\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c18c38e6b06421bafe134a1988aa594\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am very happy to take a call on Part 2, and I very much look forward to hearing more patronising speeches from Michael Woodhouse, lecturing the Committee on accident compensation. I say to the member that he would need to be here a little bit longer than 15 months to be as patronising as that. I think it is something the member should just build up to. He should talk to Mr Peachey, who is sitting next to him. He will explain how this place works.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228be012bc49b04eb7a2fb8fea1a5d5a42\u0022\u003EHon Members:\u003C/span\u003E Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279f820d13e7344999a79ed8ec57125f9\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Or maybe not; maybe Mr Woodhouse could explain to Mr Peachey how this place works\u2014I do not know; they can sort it out amongst themselves. The fact is that we did not deserve that level of arrogance from that member, given that he did not answer a number of the very serious concerns we have been raising.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd78f92f51dc473596534dd5382608fd\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019ll get to the bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256f76e552ff549edb1658a302d9373a8\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: I will get there, I say to Ms Goodhew; I am responding to the comments made by one of her colleagues. Ms Goodhew could get to her feet and answer some of the questions that members on this side of the Chamber have been raising.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222937f8f44f7249c590d2ffd3bd31b8cc\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: Personal attacks\u2014that\u2019s all that is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe446d457b9a4b94baa6b295fe3aba63\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: She says that these are just personal attacks. Well, Labour members say that this bill is an attack on every single vulnerable victim of an accident in New Zealand, and National should take it a little bit more seriously. I will pick up on the question that my colleague Darren Hughes asked. He said that this legislation would result in New Zealanders paying more and getting less. I absolutely agree. I want the next National speaker\u2014indeed, the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Labour\u2014to stand up and absolutely guarantee that not a single person in New Zealand will pay more for accident compensation and get less. If they are saying we are wrong, then can they absolutely guarantee that that is not what this legislation will result in?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022633cb3918db94b0c9524f3ab59e306e7\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re paying less than if you were on the Treasury benches.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a425ed814f834145a346ce31c48f3179\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Woodhouse refuses to answer the question. The fact is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002285ccee39711a4a799fa762267d67afcb\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I draw to your attention that thus far in this particular debate Speaker\u2019s ruling 108/5 would appear to indicate to us that this member has not yet addressed the provisions in Part 2; she has not mentioned in any respect that part of the bill. I wonder whether you could rule on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cca2e03723fa442dbd814aeb8acc2983\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I understand the point that the member is making. I have just assumed the Chair, so I have not had the time to apply myself to the nature of the content of this part. But I think it is a timely warning that this part of the debate is actually about addressing Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f3ff0de9ab645d5887db6ddae62b75b\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. Perhaps Ms Goodhew needs to read Part 2, which actually refers to levies, if she thinks that the costs\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d1148c23fab42dd90ec9d4f0ed2bb81\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: You didn\u2019t mention the word \u201Clevies\u201D once.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022980d4995b9f04713ac5f31d5a93c8576\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Oh! OK. \u201CLevies\u201D. Is the member happy? Can I now talk about the cost on New Zealanders? I said the word \u201Clevies\u201D. Is Ms Goodhew happy now? I notice how sensitive National members are; they do not like us talking about the cost on New Zealanders. But the reality is that the cost for New Zealanders will go up, and they will get less service because of this legislation, which Ms Goodhew and her National colleagues are voting for. I think that the next National speaker needs to absolutely, categorically state that that is not the case. I guarantee members that the National members will not do that, because they cannot. They know that all the evidence that the select committee heard, and all the evidence that came out in the PricewaterhouseCoopers report, shows that New Zealanders will get less and pay more. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI spoke on Part 1 last night, and one of the questions I raised\u2014which also comes up in Part 2, under clause 51\u2014was not addressed. That is, the fact that under this legislation someone who has a large fine and pays it can keep his or her accident compensation entitlement, but someone who has a large fine and cannot pay it, and ends up going to prison for non-payment of the fine, will be disentitled from accident compensation. I would like the Minister in the chair to answer that question, because I want to know why. We have heard a lot of argument and rhetoric around this clause, about how it is all about the worst of the worst and it is all about Graeme Burton, but I actually want to ask a serious question. How is it fair that someone who can pay his or her way out of a large fine can keep accident compensation entitlement, but someone who cannot pay and ends up going to prison\u2014ends up with a custodial sentence\u2014loses the entitlement? If Mr Woodhouse, who appears to be the guru on all of this, would answer that question\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223bc12074d19422cb3601a98101619fd\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a nonsense question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0b521afd86b4930994bebc95ea00cf3\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: I think that just shows exactly the colour of this National Government. I say to Mr Woodhouse that under this legislation someone who commits an offence but cannot pay the fine goes to prison and loses his or her accident compensation entitlement, but someone who commits exactly the same offence and can pay the fine because he or she is wealthy, gets to keep his or her entitlement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a45511967b02471780b53e0f1338d66a\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s an outrageous insult on the judiciary!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022726a374798c1477d947282c1881d7b5f\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I tell Mr Woodhouse that we are passing legislation that will be enacted, and I think we should be clear. This could be fixed if the Government cared enough about it to fix it. Instead of standing up and making patronising speeches that do not address any of the concerns of members on this side of the Chamber, maybe the Government could look at fixing these anomalies and taking some of these concerns a bit more seriously than it is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe other issue I raised last night was that, instead of only talking about the Graeme Burtons\u2014which we all agree was a serious issue, and that is why the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has the ability to disentitle\u2014members on the other side of the Chamber should maybe look at the reasons why ACC is not using that power, and resolve them. One of the questions the select committee asked was whether it is about information sharing. ACC said that one of the problems is that it does not know when people have been convicted. How can it disentitle people when it does not know whether they have been convicted? If the issue is information sharing between departments, then that issue should be fixed, and I would like the next National speaker or the Minister in the chair to tell us that it has been fixed. We could fix it in this legislation. We could make it absolutely clear that that information can be given directly to ACC so that it can use its power to disentitle where appropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe other thing I would like to raise is the concerns that were raised by the Legislation Advisory Committee. Mr Woodhouse is very concerned about good practice and good law. Well, this committee had a lot to say about this bill, and in particular the fact that we are now reversing that entitlement. Currently the Minister cannot disentitle; ACC does it. I think that separation is appropriate. This bill says that the Minister can entitle someone, but nothing in here has any criteria around that power. So we are now giving a power to a Minister, who can be lobbied and politically persuaded. I mean, National has done a deal with ACT over this and other legislation\u2014it hated the \u201Cthree strikes\u201D law and it was only going to select committee, but it has done some deal to support some other legislation, probably this legislation, and now they think \u201Cthree strikes\u201D is wonderful. Ministers deal in politics; Ministers make political decisions. Now a Minister has the right to entitle someone to accident compensation. This right is not sitting apart from the politics and with the department. The Legislation Advisory Committee said that in that section there should be criteria around how that decision is made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI would like the next National speaker or the Minister in the chair to explain why there are no criteria in this bill relating to this power. How will we ensure and how will the people of New Zealand have confidence that that power will not be completely unhindered by any kind of control; that the decisions that are being made will be appropriate and not political decisions; and that all politicians\u2014but Ministers in this case, who can be very prone to lobbying on a number of issues\u2014will put that lobbying aside? Labour members believe that there should be criteria. If a Minister is going to have this power\u2014and there is a question over whether a Minister should have this power\u2014then there should be criteria so people can see clearly and transparently how those decisions will be made. Maybe Mr Woodhouse could tell us why there are no such criteria in this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EFor someone who had a lot to say for himself not very long ago, he has gone very, very quiet. Now he is doing that whole: \u201CI am looking up at the gallery.\u201D thing; he did not really hear what I had to say; he does a little bit of a quirky smile. I say to Mr Woodhouse that it is all textbook; we have seen it all before. Maybe, instead of pretending that he is waving to some constituent up in the gallery, he could answer the question I am putting, which is why there are no criteria\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022890d76db339b4651b15ab5ac28edd26e\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: You have no idea how to actually talk about the bill, Moana. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022797d487f4e3b439ea5d01993df8137c1\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, Ms Goodhew is getting upset. \u201CLevies\u201D\u2014there, is she happy? I said the word \u201Clevies\u201D. Maybe Ms Goodhew could answer the questions about why there are no criteria in this legislation for the power we are giving the Minister. Does she know? Does she care? No, not really. She just wants to go home. She is just upset that we will not roll over and let the Government pass this terrible legislation, which will be incredibly damaging for all New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EMaybe Ms Goodhew could stand up and explain\u2014and I think this is a very simple question\u2014why people who use up all their holidays get to have accident compensation, and people who do not take their holidays do not. How is that fair? No one knows when he or she will have an accident. No one can predict that. But if people happen to have taken a holiday before they have the accident and used up all their holiday pay, they still get their accident compensation entitlement. But if people are unlucky enough to plan their holiday for the period after they end up having the accident, they get nothing, and they lose their holiday pay. I ask Ms Goodhew how that is fair. We see that she is now doing the \u201Ctugging on the ear, pretending I\u2019m not listening\u201D routine, which is a variation of Mr Woodhouse\u2019s \u201Cpretend I\u2019m looking at someone in the gallery\u201D routine. Maybe she could answer that question. Again, she had so much to say for herself before; maybe she could take a call and explain to me how it is fair that people lose their entitlement just because they did not take their holidays. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022 data-id=\u002275b4fa4a63974787bdd0b392a59735f0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002275b4fa4a63974787bdd0b392a59735f0\u0022\u003EALLAN PEACHEY (National\u2014T\u0101maki):\u003C/span\u003E I appreciate the chance to make a modest contribution to the debate on Part 2 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. I will begin gently. I do not know that the last speaker\u2014Moana Mackey, who is a very experienced member of this Committee\u2014particularly addressed Part 2, but she certainly got a lot of her agenda out there. I gently point out to her that on this side of the Chamber we write our own speeches. We do not need an Opposition member to tell us what we will talk about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EIt is with a slightly heavy heart that I speak this morning. We have been through the first reading of this bill and a lengthy select committee process during which, on occasion, the contribution of Opposition members was valued and very positive. We have had the second reading and have been through Part 1 in the Committee stage. We are now on Part 2, and all the Labour members have done is to get a whole pile off their chests, much of which is not particularly relevant to this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EI repeat to Opposition members the offer I made to them last night. Let us get rid of all the posturing, posing, and displays of emotion that have been going on. In this debate on Part 2, I ask why the Opposition members do not reach out to the Government members in the way we are trying to reach out to them, and agree that we have to save the accident compensation scheme. Part 2 is about saving the scheme, so why do we not get down to work and do so together? The people of New Zealand require us to save the scheme, and that is what Part 2 does. Along with Part 1, it is about making the scheme affordable and financially viable for ordinary New Zealanders well into the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EThe member Ms Beaumont did a far better job than the speaker who followed her, Moana Mackey, of addressing the clauses of Part 2, and I commend her for that, at least. She talked about Part 2 being an attack on workers. I do not understand that. An attack on workers would have happened had Labour remained in office. The consequence of Labour remaining in office and persisting with the attitude it has shown in this debate would have been the collapse of the scheme as a 24/7 accident insurance scheme that still has the potential, if fixed by measures such as those contained in Part 2, to serve New Zealanders well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EThe phrase \u201Cmean-spirited\u201D was used. I cannot see what in Part 2 could be described as mean-spirited. What is mean-spirited about introducing changes to the legislation that save the scheme within the realms of what the country can afford? The Opposition should have learnt from 9 long and, some would say, miserable years in Government that we can throw money at a situation for only so long. At some point in time, responsibility has to be exercised. I ask Labour members when they will start showing some responsibility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EWe heard the phrase \u201Cblatant unfairness\u201D. Is it blatant unfairness to the taxpayers and levy payers of New Zealand to make the accident compensation scheme more affordable and, therefore, to save it? That is what Part 2 does\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d777681823d4588a1c13e42f3fb4ecb\u0022\u003EColin King\u003C/span\u003E: Sustainable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022756bcd11fa834393bb77ec46fe562873\u0022\u003EALLAN PEACHEY\u003C/span\u003E: As my colleague Mr King says, it makes the scheme affordable and sustainable. What is blatantly unfair about that? Nothing in Part 2 is blatantly unfair to anybody. The words \u201Cmean\u201D, \u201Cnasty\u201D, and \u201Cunfair\u201D are emotive words that have no meaning in Part 2. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u00225e32748ca1bf4ee7a28ad53ccbd3d9c3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225e32748ca1bf4ee7a28ad53ccbd3d9c3\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will talk to clause 53 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill, which relates to transitional provisions concerning gradual process workplace disease. This clause relates to a change that is being made to the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act. The change disentitles some people who can currently prove a workplace accident relating to gradual process disease. After this transitional provision comes into effect, they will not be able to. I will explain to those who are interested the nature of the change that is being made and how it is unfair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003ECurrently it is quite hard to prove a work-related gradual process disease or infection. If someone has an illness, there are often a lot of possible causes. If someone has an illness that may be related to exposure to chemicals at work or on a farm, for example, then there is some onus on that person to show that exposure to those chemicals caused the disease, and not some other cause. I would have thought that is quite a hard, albeit appropriate, test to meet. One of the ways in which the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) goes about assessing whether this link is sufficiently proven is through ministerial advisory groups of experts, who look into these things. As the quality of science improves and their knowledge as to these links grows, the decisions that are made by ACC no doubt become better. Incidentally, another provision in this bill does away with those advisory boards, which to me seem necessary and ought not to be disposed of. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EMy point in respect of clause 53 is that, in addition to the existing test, this bill introduces another impediment to getting cover. That impediment is found in clause 7, which does not come into effect until the transitional provisions of clause 53 apply. The new test in clause 7 says that people will not be able to get compensation for work-related disease caused by exposure to chemicals if that same chemical is found to any material extent in their non-employment activities or environment. So if someone now has exposure at work to chemicals that cause disease, and if that exposure causes a disease, then that person can get accident compensation. But if he or she has material exposure outside of work\u2014at home\u2014the Government will deem that that person did not get the disease from work. It does not have to be greater exposure at home; it just has to be some material exposure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI could understand if employers were saying that they were paying for the cost of non - work-related exposure to these chemicals, that it was too tough, and that maybe there should be some sort of pro-rata assessment of whether that injury should fall inside or outside the employers\u2019 compensation scheme. I can see myself being persuaded that if there were partly a work cause and partly a non-work cause, then the compensation should be proportionately divided and put to the different accounts. Indeed, if there is no compensation for work-related disease partly caused outside of work, then a person might not get full compensation if part of it was caused outside work. But to completely take away cover from someone who has a work-related disease because some of the disease was not work-related is just wrong. It is unfair. It denies the reality that this person has suffered work-related disease as a consequence of exposure to chemicals at work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThese things are real. I think that most people who run constituency clinics will have met people who worked in photographic processing shops; that problem is dying out as technology changes. They were being exposed to the chemicals\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b61b535d6eff4b0a8534b71255160bb3\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Glutaraldehyde.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220eb419cb8a9e423eae0b5e552d88b9d7\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am told glutaraldehyde is the chemical; I do not know that from memory. Those chemicals cause skin problems and respiratory problems, and in some cases people have terribly affected lives. These consequences are not minor; they are life-changing events. This clause would say that amateur photographers\u2014presumably some of these employees are amateur photographers\u2014would no longer be entitled to compensation relating to personal injury caused by gradual process disease or infection as a consequence of exposure to those chemicals at work, despite the fact that the vast majority of their exposure to those chemicals was at work and therefore was the cause of their injury. That, in my opinion, goes too far. As I said, I could understand an argument to rateably apportion the cost between the two different causes, but to say that just because there is a material effect from the outside-of-work exposure those people should have no right to any compensation for their work-related injury goes too far. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EAgain, the question is: why are we doing this? We already know that work-related accident compensation levies for employers in New Zealand are lower than they are anywhere in the world that we are aware of. The only information the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee had in that respect was the comparison with Australia, which clearly showed that the costs for our employers are already lower. So what is the justification for reducing them further by effectively excluding cover for these real injuries? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EJohn Boscawen said that costs are going up and therefore we should truncate the scheme. It is true that medical costs are going up. They are going up for a number of reasons. There has been high inflation in the health sector, which I think will abate, and ever more sophisticated procedures are available to ensure that people live healthier, longer lives in the face of injury and disease. Those procedures cost, and as a country we face the pressures of meeting that additional cost. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EWe make choices as to how the extra wealth that is generated in a society is allocated. We are a country that grows wealthier over time. Every country, as it grows wealthier, chooses, if they have a bit of disposable income or more disposable income, to spend more of that disposal income every year on health care, because health care is so intrinsically important to quality of life. If people have the choice of spending more on quality of life\u2014if they can afford it\u2014they do. As a country we can afford to pay more for quality of life every year, and we do. We should not be stuck in some 1950s paradigm that says that that was all we could afford back then, and therefore all we should try to aspire to afford these days is the level of cover that we used to have. That is not the way for New Zealand. We want improving quality of service in medical services in New Zealand as the economy improves and as technology improves. That is called progress. Some of the comments we heard from John Boscawen seemed to be that the reality is that medical procedures all become too expensive and we just have to put a ring-fence round it and say that we are sorry, but people will not get anything more. I disagree with that view. I think that we can as a country pick up some of these additional costs, because we become wealthier as our economy grows. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThat is not to say that we ought not to be prudent and to try to manage costs. I certainly agree that we ought to maximise rehabilitation so as to minimise those costs, but I am certainly not one of those people who thinks that we should have as an objective keeping expenditure in these areas static, because in reality we cannot unless we freeze ourselves in time and slowly become a backward country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI will also talk about the residual levy. I agree with some provisions in this part of the bill. There is a problem with the levy-setting process of the accident compensation scheme. Changes in rates of return can have an enormous effect on the capital pool that is needed to fund some of these old residual claims over time, and therefore the change in the parameter of expectation as to what the rate of return on investments will be for the next 20 years might go from 5 percent to 4.5 percent per annum. That change has an effect worth many billions of dollars on the pool of assets that is required to be held by the scheme to meet the long-term life of those old claims. That number bounces around every year and causes real volatility in the levy that is set for those residual claims, particularly as we approach the end of that funding. We are doing two things here: we are extending the date from 2014 to 2019, which is good; and we are putting that date in stone, which I think is a wise policy decision by the Government, and I congratulate it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u002285174f6f4b08458eadaee66ace34474e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002285174f6f4b08458eadaee66ace34474e\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills):\u003C/span\u003E Deciding who to give the next call to was a major dilemma, and I really think you moved forward on it with courage and correctness, Mr Chairman! I thank you very much for giving me the privilege of taking the next call. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EI will add to the comments made by the member who has just resumed his seat, the Hon David Parker, in relation to John Boscawen\u2019s comments, but I will also recall different comments that that member made during his contribution. John Boscawen began his speech by asking why we are now paying more and getting less in accident compensation. He asked why that was. Well, the answer is very simple: we have a National-ACT Government that will make New Zealanders pay more levies, pay higher levies, and get less through reduced entitlements. That is what we get under a National-ACT Government. Mr Boscawen should ask that question while looking into the mirror. What part has he played in making sure that New Zealanders under the scheme now have to pay more and get less? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EAs an example of that reduction in entitlements I will look at clause 54 in Part 2, which is the part we are debating at this moment. I think that this debate will go on for some time, given the number of people I have seen seeking calls. The provision I will refer to, which will certainly cause people to be paying more and getting less, relates to vocational independence. \u201CVocational independence\u201D is a lovely term, is it not? It sounds as though people who have had an injury have had proper, high-quality rehabilitation and are now able to move back into a paid job if that is what they had before, or even if they did not have a paid job previously\u2014a younger person, a student, or a parent with the primary responsibility for caring for the children may not have been in a paid job. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EVocational independence sounds great, but the National Government has gutted the basis of the vocational independence assessment. It has made three major changes with this amendment. Clause 54 refers to the assessment, but it does not give the details of those dramatic changes. The first is that people\u2019s pre-injury earning capacity will no longer be considered as part of the vocational assessment process. For example, a Minister of the Crown, earning quite a good income, has the misfortune of having an injury\u2014I would not wish that on any Minister of the Crown. That Minister then goes through some rehabilitation. Part of the vocational independence assessment, under this legislation, will no longer require one\u2019s earning capacity as a Minister to be taken into account. The vocational assessor might tell the Minister that he or she is fit to work as a cleaner in a Minister\u2019s office, and that would be determined under this amendment as vocational independence. Well, there is one word for that: \u201Cunfair\u201D. It is not fair for a person to be moved so dramatically from one scale of earning or potential earning to another, much lower scale because of an injury. People\u2019s pre-injury earning capacity should remain as part of the consideration. The officials confirmed to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee\u2014and I give them credit for doing so\u2014that changing \u201Cmust\u201D to \u201Cmay\u201D can be interpreted by a vocational assessor as \u201Cmay not\u201D. So it will not matter a toss to the vocational assessor what the person was earning before his or her injury; all the vocational assessor will be interested in is turfing that person off accident compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe second change that I will refer to is that, where a person is assessed as having the capacity to do a job, it will not matter whether it is a real job. It will not matter whether such a job is available in New Zealand. Many examples of that happened in the 1990s, and this bill will head us in that direction. There were many examples where people were deemed to have the capacity to be a lift operator, for example. I ask members when the last time was that anyone in this Chamber went into a lift in Kirkcaldie and Stains, Smith and Caughey\u2019s, Ballantynes, or James Smith\u2019s and had a lift operator ask which floor madam or sir would like to go to. We do not have lift operators in New Zealand any more. Those were the olden days, which is where clause 54 in Part 2 of this amendment bill will take us. That is exactly the situation this clause will take us back to, because the clause removes the requirement for the job that the person is assessed to be capable of doing to be a real job. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe other example that I recall very well was that of a man who was assessed as being capable of being a tap-dancer. I have not seen a lot of tap-dancing jobs going in New Zealand on which one could earn money or keep a family, but that was what the vocational assessor said. Later that same week Paul Holmes interviewed the tap-dancer. It was revealed that the man\u2014who had been assessed by the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) as being vocationally independent, able to move off accident compensation, and fit to be a tap-dancer\u2014had only one leg. That would be a very, very hard duty to perform, but that is exactly what this amendment makes possible again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister for ACC, is right to hang her head and keep her mouth closed. She seems to be\u2014and she should be\u2014ashamed of what she is doing to ordinary, hard-working New Zealanders who have had the misfortune of being injured. This amendment takes us back to having no consideration of pre-injury earning capacity. Georgina te Heuheu thinks it is funny. Well, I do not think it is funny that people who had high-paying jobs, who worked hard to get ahead in their careers, and who were able to offer their families good financial support because of their hard work and determination will now be told by ACC that that does not count any more, and that they are fit to do very low-paid, menial jobs with no career prospects. Under this amendment, that is all right. Well, I say to Mrs te Heuheu that it is not all right. I will be very interested to see members of the M\u0101ori community front up to that member and say exactly what the impact will be on M\u0101ori families. That member should be raising questions with her ministerial colleagues rather than laughing at the unfair treatment that this amendment will dish out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe third change in the work-capacity vocational independence assessment outlined in clause 54 is the reduction in hours. Currently, people have to be determined to be fit to do a real job\u2014taking into consideration their pre-injury earning capacity\u2014for 35 hours a week. That is fair. It is not a full-time job, but it is pretty close to it; 35 hours a week is, in the main, enough to keep a family on. This amendment reduces that requirement to 30 hours. Someone may be deemed to be capable of working only 30 hours in a low-paid job. Even if that person is able to get a low-paid job, he or she, frankly, could not keep his or her family going on that many hours a week. It is just not possible if one is the primary income earner. The inclusion of that amendment says to injured people that we do not care what they were doing before the injury, we do not care whether there is a real job, and we do not care whether they can afford to keep their families on 30 hours a week. That is not what Labour says. Labour believes that what people were earning before their injury should be taken into account in the assessment process. They should be able to work for 35 hours a week, and the job that they are determined as being fit to do should be a real job. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThat is what ordinary New Zealanders who have the misfortune of having an injury deserve out of a scheme that they pay for. They pay for it out of their hard-earned income; they deserve fair treatment when they are injured. That is all the New Zealand public want. They do not want what National and ACT are dishing up, which is to pay more for accident compensation but get less in return. They just want a fair go. Frankly, I do not think that is too much to ask. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThroughout this bill there are amendments that cut back provisions that people now expect as part of the social contract they have bought into with the Government. We will see increased calls for the right to sue. I am sure that Associate Minister Pansy Wong will say that maybe people should have the right to sue, but why would any one of us want to take New Zealand down a track of litigation, of stress, of putting money into lawyers\u2019 pockets, and of many hundreds of people losing their entitlement and their rights to a fair go through the court system? We have a fair and just system now, and we should keep it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u0022b6615a7b3bc14dd28370bc5cd0fef144\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b6615a7b3bc14dd28370bc5cd0fef144\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (Junior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022 data-id=\u002288ebde9c2b7542ab8fbb463da9f98ac2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002288ebde9c2b7542ab8fbb463da9f98ac2\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I came to the Chamber to listen to the debate on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill because it is an issue that Labour intends to fight strongly on. We are believers in the accident compensation system that has served New Zealanders so well for so long. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI listened to Mr Peachey\u2019s speech; it was a 3-minute attack on Labour\u2019s record in Government. He stressed the need to have an affordable and sustainable system. I tell Mr Peachey that this bill\u2014and as a constituency MP, Mr Peachey will know this\u2014will undermine the confidence that New Zealanders have in the scheme that they are paying for. It is their scheme to cover them when they have an accident. As other members are doing in their constituency offices, I am picking up on people coming back to us asking why they are being denied cover under a scheme they thought they would be covered by. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI agree with the points that Mr Peachey made about the scheme needing to be affordable and sustainable, and so do New Zealanders. But from the National Government we are getting nothing more than a propaganda campaign to undermine accident compensation for its own political purposes. I ask people to read a story in the newspaper today about a 15-year-old girl who injured her hip playing sport. The mother has gone vocal because she said that she thought the accident compensation scheme would cover her child in the event of an accident, yet she was turned down for cover. Why was she turned down? Because the medical assessor for accident compensation said she had an unusual-shaped hip. Before she had that accident she was playing sport and was an active child. She was like any ordinary kid at 15\u2014lively, running, and enjoying life. She is now in such agony and pain that she can do nothing. She can hardly walk. She is on painkillers. That is a very good example of the system not being fair. Why would that child be turned down just because an assessor said she had an unusual-shaped hip? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI say to Mr Peachey that when he makes speeches about the scheme being affordable, sustainable, and all the fancy words the National members are using he should think about the New Zealanders who need to have access to accident compensation and rehabilitation. This is not an insurance scheme, as National has tried to paint it; it is a scheme to help New Zealanders in the event of an accident. If they have an accident, they need help. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI was staggered by John Boscawen\u2019s comments. He really labelled what this Government is doing, and I think it should be said by every member of the Opposition. He said that we are paying more and getting less. I thank Mr Boscawen for that comment. New Zealanders will be paying more and getting less. I have a question for him: why is he voting for a bill that will mean people pay more and get less? That seems a bit crazy to me. We have had no answer to that question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI think one of the big issues in these transition clauses is the issue of New Zealanders who will lose access to hearing aids that they need because of hearing loss. People have already come to me around this issue. They have come to me because they have a workplace injury: they have lost their hearing at work. They have gone to work year after year and worked in a noisy environment in a time when they did not take a lot of care about health and safety. A lot of those changes came in under a Labour Government, and much of it was called \u201Cbossy PC\u201D Government. But we believe in workplace safety. Many New Zealanders who have gone to work in a noisy environment year after year now have hearing loss. The reason why the Government is changing the entitlement is not that it does not want people to have hearing aids; it is that it thinks too many are getting them and it is costing too much money. It is saying that because the cost has gone up\u2014of course, the cost of hearing aids has gone up, too\u2014it will now put a threshold on when people can get a hearing aid. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EWe and the National members have been told that many New Zealanders who do not meet this threshold will still not be able to hear daily things around them. A very good example was their not being able to hear children speaking, because of the pitch of their voices. We were told that these people would miss out on parts of their lives that they should be able to enjoy with help from the accident compensation scheme. They did not choose to lose their hearing. They did not deliberately go out, put on earphones, and listen to heavy metal; they were actually working amongst heavy metal and heard the noise and the thumps of their workplace, and so they lost their hearing. I think it is shameful to treat our workers in such a way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI also endorse the comments made by Ruth Dyson around clause 54 and the area of vocational assessment. I have to say that I had not heard the story of the one-legged tap-dancer. He was assessed following an injury as being able to tap-dance\u2014he had a job he could do. He was assessed as being able to be a tap-dancer, but he was found to have only one leg. I imagine it is quite difficult to tap-dance on one leg. The only thing I can say is that the person was lucky he did not have both legs missing. He may have then been assessed as being able to do something else. Who knows? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EThis is the stupidity of this whole change. Why would we not take into account someone\u2019s pre-earning capacity and his or her capability to do a job? It is demeaning to New Zealanders\u2014who may well have gone to university, got qualifications, been top earners, and supported their families\u2014to be told that they have been assessed as able to do a job that does not relate to anything they have spent their life doing, and that many of them will have paid to be qualified in. This is another method of reducing access to accident compensation for New Zealanders. I know there will be many, many other examples. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EThis is a sad day. I hope New Zealanders are listening to this debate, because they are seeing the gradual destruction through the tyranny of the majority in this Committee of a scheme that has served New Zealanders well. When we were in Government we were not looking for New Zealanders to pay more and get less; we were looking for a system that worked and provided cover to many, many people, including the families of people who commit suicide. I think this Government has taken an axe to the scheme for no other purpose than its own political philosophy and ideology. We knew it was coming, unfortunately. We warned New Zealanders it would happen. We said that National would make drastic changes to accident compensation and would set out to undermine and privatise the scheme, which is exactly what is happening in conjunction with ACT. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EAt the end of the day, we will see New Zealanders demanding the right to sue. We have to ask whether we would blame them. The mother of the 15-year-old I told members about will be asking why she should not sue, if she cannot get compensation. What about the ACC doctor who said her child should not get cover, because she has oddly shaped hips? We have to wonder why an ACC doctor would do that, other than that he or she was being paid by ACC. That is an extremely serious issue. Too many cases come to me where people say they have grave doubts about the fairness of the assessments that are done on them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI conclude by saying that Mr Peachey wants a sustainable and affordable system, but National is making New Zealanders pay more and get less. That is what this bill is doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022 data-id=\u002251f30b36a75b45bdba297ddc7fc5eb4f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002251f30b36a75b45bdba297ddc7fc5eb4f\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour\u2014Wellington Central):\u003C/span\u003E I thank the Chair for giving me the call on this occasion; I know it was a tough choice with such an admirable team here ready to take the fight to the National Government on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EI will speak about the transitional provisions in Part 2, particularly those relating to compensation for earnings and holiday pay. However, I want to make reference to an interjection we heard from Sir Roger Douglas when Annette King was saying that the bill is going through with ACT\u2019s support. We need to take ourselves back in this debate and remember that the ACT Party supports this bill on the condition that the scheme moves towards privatisation. Sir Roger can correct me if he likes, but that is the ACT Party\u2019s reason for supporting this bill\u2014that the scheme move towards privatisation. Sir Roger just said the bill does not go far enough yet, but clearly that is the reason why ACT supports this bill. Clearly, National\u2019s direction must be towards privatisation, because that is why the ACT Party is supporting the bill. The M\u0101ori Party is not supporting this bill. Its members have said today in the Chamber that they are not supporting this bill, and I am sure that is because they believe that National is going towards privatisation. The ACT Party is leading National here, saying that it will go with National as long as it goes in the direction of privatisation. That agenda is what lies behind this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022967c3f5dca244fbe947ed14523f13d3e\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Peter Dunne will go where he can.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aaa4c5eeff93469fa7468c7470e7daa6\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, we do not know what Peter Dunne will do, but I am sure there will be a ministerial job at the end of it, whatever it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EIn Part 2 we see the essence of the unfairness of this bill, particularly in respect of compensation for earnings. I refer back to the original principles of the Woodhouse commission, which established the accident compensation scheme, and, in particular, to the principle of real compensation. I will read out what the commission said. It observed that modern households have several financial commitments that \u201Cdo not disappear conveniently if one of the hazards of modern life suddenly produces physical misfortune.\u201D We can understand that. Financial commitments do not go away. We all know that. We all know about the fixed costs that we have in our lives and need to meet. In particular, people who are on lower incomes and people who undertake seasonal work have to work very, very hard to manage their budgets to know they will be able to handle things if something comes along.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EWhen New Zealanders accepted the Woodhouse report and when the accident compensation scheme was put in place, they entered into a social contract that said: \u201CWe\u2019re not going to sue, we\u2019re not going to do anything that\u2019s litigious, because we accept that the scheme will look after us, 24-hour, no-fault.\u201D The commission went on to say that a social compensation system \u201Cshould rest upon a realistic assessment of actual loss, both physical and economic, followed by a shifting of that loss\u201D\u2014and these are the important words\u2014\u201Con a suitably generous basis.\u201D The figure of 80 percent for earnings-related compensation was designed to offer real compensation and to take into account those words, but to leave a proportion of the loss with the injured person in order to encourage personal initiative. We can understand that. We have supported that system over a long period of time. Well, under this bill that system is completely and utterly undermined. The transitional provisions that we see here will undermine that principle for a number of workers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EWe are returning to the position before the 2008 amendment when weekly compensation for non-permanent employees would be averaged out to reflect the fact that had they not been injured, they would have expected periods of earnings and non-earnings over a 12-month period. So, for people in casual employment or in employment where they are not certain of their futures, their compensation will be divided over a full 12-month period. That is unfair and unjust. National members opposite need to stand up and say why they are putting forward a bill that increases unfairness. Most of us in the House have come here because we want New Zealand to be a fair place, yet we have before us legislation that manifestly increases unfairness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EIn the Council of Trade Union\u2019s submission to the committee, it cited an interesting example of people who will be treated unfairly as a result of the clauses we are debating here. I will read out the example it gave. A woman who has been financially dependent on her husband for most of the year undertakes some seasonal work and is severely injured on the fourth week of the job. Her earnings of $450 per week for the 4 weeks of her job is divided by 52 weeks. At 80 percent, that means that her weekly compensation will be $27. How is that fair? How is it fair that somebody in that situation will have his or her earnings divided over the course of a whole year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EThe process whereby an employee is categorised as non-permanent is also completely arbitrary under these new changes. It essentially requires the Accident Compensation Corporation to make a guess as to how long the employee might have continued working over the 12-month period. This provision is another unfairness, another way in which the principle of real compensation brought forward by Owen Woodhouse as part of the social contract is being undermined by this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EI want to look at the key principle of community responsibility. Society accepts that we have a responsibility for those who have been hurt through no fault of their own. Annette King talked about people who have suffered hearing loss, not because of something they themselves have done but because of doing jobs that many people in this Chamber would not want to do, like jobs in heavy industry. Michael Woodhouse, who has lectured us today about the accident compensation scheme, would not want to do those jobs, but I am sure he knows many people in Dunedin who do those jobs, many of whom, I am sure, he has worked alongside in the past. They have done those kinds of jobs and as a community\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c189f5914a4549baa5c816ab08bcb0b7\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Not alongside.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdb22a052ace45469c95c2d0b0b56c55\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON\u003C/span\u003E: Not alongside. Perhaps he knew some of them. He probably refereed them when they were playing rugby. But that community responsibility is undermined if we say to those people: \u201CWe don\u2019t think you are worth it. We think you\u2019re worth $27 a week. That\u2019s what we think you\u2019re worth.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f41a11730594c7fa1ff57e4c8fbc593\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: And no hearing aid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275ae9a0a1fb847419eec97d29139aa50\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON\u003C/span\u003E: That is right; as Annette King says, no hearing aid. So that principle of the Woodhouse commission is totally undermined.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EI want to raise the issue of holiday pay, which is dealt with in clause 58. Treasury has pointed out that the provision saves only $1 million, but it is incredibly unfair to those who have already earned holiday pay but have been unlucky enough not to have actually used it. Let us look at two workers with different circumstances at the time they have an accident: one worker is up to date and has not accrued any holiday pay, and the other worker is owed 4 weeks\u2019 holiday pay. Under clause 58, both workers are treated completely differently, and that is manifestly unfair. Labour members have asked members opposite over and over again to tell us why they support something that is so manifestly unfair. The bill requires holiday pay, including holiday pay accrued before an injury, to be counted and abated against weekly compensation. That will result in manifest unfairness right across New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EEvery constituency member in this House will have had people come to them to talk about the unfairness of the accident compensation scheme. Someone came to me on Friday with exactly that problem. He was unable to work out what the bill would mean for him, was dealing with difficulties at the moment, and was scared about the future and that of his family. For a bill to come before the House that puts people in that position is shameful for National members. They should be prepared to take a call on the clauses that put into practice the unfairness around compensation for hours lost and around holiday pay. Yet we have failed to see that from any member. I would like to see the Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister for ACC, take at least one call this morning to defend the bill. We know how much she loves talking in the Chamber, but we have not heard her today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EThis bill is unfair and unjust and Labour will continue to oppose it and ask National for answers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u00229b426de09f50409bb19b52b2d9653d59\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229b426de09f50409bb19b52b2d9653d59\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Labour\u2014Dunedin North):\u003C/span\u003E I want to take up some remarks made by my colleague Grant Robertson when he referred to the Woodhouse report and the social contract. We are seeing in the Chamber today changes to the legislation that directly and determinedly abrogate that contract. The contract was that the right to sue would be removed and in the stead of the removal of that right there was to be a thing called an accident compensation scheme. The idea of accident compensation back then was always manifold. It included, for example, back then, 30 years ago, significant attention on injury prevention. It included the idea that people would be substantially\u2014and the figure chosen was 80 percent\u2014kept free of the risk of their being injured as a result of an accident through no fault of their own, and it was on the basis of no fault. Now we see, through these changes, creeping deterioration of that contract, and my colleague Grant Robertson and other speakers have given example after example of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EHoliday pay would do as an example\u2014one example. If one is sick and goes to Work and Income and says: \u201CI have an illness, I need some sick leave.\u201D, I wonder whether members could tell me whether Work and Income would say to that person to first of all use all his or her holiday pay. Is that the case? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226dc5e0a34eeb46aaaf299c78a29ca73e\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220771b05cff904a7ca9702e02eed9dc84\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, it is the case. Let us come to bereavement leave. In the situation where someone has an illness, and applies to have access to bereavement leave, is that person told to use his or her holiday pay first? If a member of Parliament breaks his or her leg, is that member of Parliament told by Parliamentary Service that before he or she goes to the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) he or she must use up his or her holiday pay? Actually, he or she is not told that, for this reason: members of Parliament, if they break a leg, receive no pay cut at all. They do not go near ACC; they do not need to\u2014not if they are going to be away for a week or two. One can be a parliamentarian with a broken leg; I have seen a number of them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThere is a difference between people in different strata of society. If I am a meatworker and I break a leg, my pay stops that day. If I am a member of Parliament and I break a leg, my pay does not stop, and unless I am away for a long time my pay will not stop. So, you see, we already have a situation where some people in society need not worry too much about accident compensation and the finer points about whether holiday pay is up for grabs. Members of Parliament are some of those people and yet we, as a group of 120-odd people, are deciding by majority to remove the rights of a whole lot of others, even though we do not even face the problem ourselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003ENational members should be actively defending this legislation, for indeed I find it straightforwardly indefensible, but there is not a word from them on these transition provisions in Part 2\u2014or indeed much else in this legislation. We see National members doing the opposite: they are staying silent, talking about a system being broken when it is making $1 billion profit a year, and saying that we must move quickly to constrain the ability of people to get accident compensation for financial reasons. That is not the social contract. The social contract was never: \u201CWe\u2019re going to take away the right to sue so long as we can afford it.\u201D The social contract was that the right to sue goes and therefore we as a society will set out to get some social insurance running to ensure that if people are injured through accident they are held free from personal damage from that. No longer is that the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThese days, under this legislation, meatworkers should get injured late in the season, because if they are injured early in the season, it is too bad. The way the calculations are done means that those injuries will be thoroughly improperly and incompletely compensated. The meatworker\u2019s fault was to get injured early in the season; if a meatworker is injured late in the season, then there is less fault visited on that private individual. That is not a social contract; that is penny-pinching\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022027c2fdf9f024bf19e88079c74f92cf9\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Cheating.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a253ae1d04a0477da955927b6111e3f2\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and it is cheating. What is more, it is cheating on a group of people who are already limited in their ability to secure 12 months\u2019 income because of the very nature of their seasonal work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EEntrenched unfairness is being legislated here, and that is not nice. It feels ugly and it is also, in my view, something that should be defended. I think that the people who are about to do this to the public of New Zealand have an obligation to get up and say why they are doing it. They have an obligation to give the other point of view, an obligation to say there are reasons behind this legislation, and here they are. This is supposed to be a debating chamber. It is not. It is an echo chamber, because there is nothing coming back from the Minister in the chair, the Hon Pansy Wong, and there is nothing coming back from the so-called staunch supporters in National, every one of whom will vote yes to pass this legislation. Not one of those members is getting up to defend it. Is there a word for that, which begins with \u201Cc\u201D, that I am not allowed to use? There may be. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003ELet me just ask another question. Why is the hearing loss threshold of 6 percent defensible? Why is that defensible? Does that mean that the Government has come to the view that all hearing loss of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 percent must be age related and that hearing loss beyond that may be accident linked or injury linked?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e85f0043b4e84fff91b0c852a83db339\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: No, because that is over and above the 6 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5735b14ffc8407ca9b4b83a43375bf4\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: OK, so I am advised by one of my colleagues the Hon David Parker, who is our spokesperson on ACC and who knows about these things, that the way it is done is that age-related hearing loss is estimated first and then 6 percent is added. That means that if one is an older New Zealander, one needs to have a hearing loss of somewhat more than 6 percent before the scheme will operate. So if hearing loss that is age related is already taken into account, why is the figure not 0 percent? Let us see if the Government can answer that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EIf it were to be 1 percent, that means that the little wee accident was not compensatable. That, itself, is a break of the social contract. But we have got ourselves up to 6 percent. I suspect that many people in the public arena are not aware that 6 percent hearing loss is substantial. It does not mean that someone hears 94 percent of everything; it does not mean that. It does mean that in a busy society where there is a lot of incidental noise and where there may be more than one conversation running, that hearing loss is very substantial under those circumstances. So we have a 6 percent threshold that was no doubt stolen from some other jurisdiction, which, no doubt, did not have that social contract in the first place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThis system is unique to New Zealand. It is unique in our history. It is the envy of the world. When one goes to Australia\u2014I suspect the 6 percent threshold came from Australia, did it not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c78a06e98a3c41a78b5e992fe4b6b89d\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it\u2019s misrepresented!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ef95de7c7b2480aa053b8680e1e5216\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, it has been misrepresented! It came from Australia, but it became an aberration on the way over. It is a trans-Tasman aberration. If we go to Australia, we will not find even the history of the social contract. How do we know? Because if we engage in conversation with any doctor in Australia he or she will say, sooner or later: \u201CGosh, we would like your accident compensation scheme, because we would not have to self insure so much for our practice. We would not have to put up with ambulance-chasing lawyers. New Zealand does not have them, but we have them in Australia.\u201D Members must see that the system is different. Not only that, but our scheme is known to be better. So why would one take a system that is known to be better, proven to be better\u2014in fact, was there not a great big report in only 2008?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022386c3f6c66544254838ad50d4cd46cf2\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: PricewaterhouseCoopers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1c6f415cc364edfab05880aedd7c9da\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: A PricewaterhouseCoopers report. The scheme got a big tick, was it? Am I right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022641191487fd04e21aa58202aabbc2a65\u0022\u003EHon member\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9fc481a58be472390d3f6496f709569\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: There was a big tick for the scheme, then a change of Government, which said: \u201COh, let us change it.\u201D That has to be defended in this House. National members of Parliament must get up and answer that. I ask my colleagues across the Chamber what PricewaterhouseCoopers got wrong. What did it get wrong? It was a massive report, and what did the National Party in Opposition say at the time? Did the National Opposition members say it cost too much?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226402c1ac51774efb93c9d8acd7557d6c\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Probably.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c80670188014e63a55e3c682aacc9f8\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: They probably did say it cost too much. Did they read it? Who knows? The big review said things were pretty good with the accident compensation scheme, and only months later it somehow has all turned to custard. That is not believable, it is not credible, it is not defensible, and therefore it must be defended by the people who will vote for this legislation to come forward. I say to them that they have an obligation to get up and put their point of view\u2014we will listen to it\u2014so that the public can see what the other side of the debate looks like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u0022edec2adbed56471e8ea9f25b35bd8287\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022edec2adbed56471e8ea9f25b35bd8287\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022 data-id=\u00227074d362036743ca8f4ddc1ca1ff3fd2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227074d362036743ca8f4ddc1ca1ff3fd2\u0022\u003EDAVID SHEARER (Labour\u2014Mt Albert):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to take a call on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill, which the Opposition is opposing very strongly, because it really cuts to the heart of what divides us as parties in this Committee. One of the principles on which the accident compensation scheme was established was that we gave up the right to litigate in order that we would have a scheme that stood by us and supported us when we had an accident. The whole point about this bill is that it undermines that contract. It undermines our ability to get the sort of assistance and the sort of support that we need when we have an accident. That is the sort of message that is coming through the doors of my office when I meet my constituents in Mt Albert. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EAs the Hon Annette King spoke of, Mr Boscawen said that the whole point about the accident compensation scheme is that we will be paying more and getting less. That is exactly what this bill will cause. It further undermines the contract we have with New Zealanders, who expect us to stand up and defend a system that gives them the right to proper compensation and proper support when they have an accident. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EAnother principle on which this accident compensation scheme is based is that it spreads risk. No matter what we do in our society\u2014whether we are a timber worker, a factory worker, or work in a more benign office environment\u2014we all pay an amount that means that we are all supported and receive the same compensation. This is so that we do not end up like people in other countries like Australia, where if they want to take their kids to school sport or something like that, they have to pay more to ensure that their accidents are covered. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThe passage of this bill moves us towards the privatisation and the undermining of those principles. Why are we passing a bill that requires us to pay more and get less? Frankly, because the Minister for ACC is saying that the accident compensation scheme is technically insolvent and is going down the gurgler. What a lot of nonsense! That statement completely misrepresents what insolvency actually is, and that has been picked up by many of the commentators who have an understanding of what the scheme does in New Zealand. Rod Oram, for example, noted last year that \u201C \u2026 there is a huge gap between the rhetoric of John Key and Smith, and reality.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EJonathan Eriksen, an actuary\u2014that is, an expert on insurance and claims\u2014of Eriksen and Associates said: \u201CAll this talk of liabilities being blown out is complete nonsense. It\u2019s ill-founded and smacks of scaremongering, which, given the current economic picture, is the last thing people need to be told,\u201D. We are talking this up, and people out there in New Zealand are starting to believe, unfortunately, that this scheme can no longer be affordable for New Zealand when, actually, that is not the truth, at all. That justification is being used to ram through this bill, which will mean that New Zealanders pay more and get much less. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EA respected journalist in the New Zealand Herald, Brian Fallow, said this last year: \u201CFor the Government to wrap legitimate concerns about slippage in ACC\u2019s performance in a whole lot of shrill scaremongering and scapegoating is gratuitous. Indeed it is downright irresponsible when talking about the scheme to use terms like \u2018insolvent\u2019 and \u2018going down the gurgler\u2019\u2014even if the context is counterfactual\u2014because there are people who depend on it to keep body and soul together and will do so for the rest of their days.\u201D It is exactly the contract on which we established the scheme. It is exactly the contract by which New Zealanders gave up the right to litigate their accidents\u2014giving massive amounts of profit to lawyers, as they do in other countries\u2014in order to have a scheme that will support them and that they will be able to depend on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis scheme, as many of my fellow party members have spoken of, is very good value. We heard from Pete Hodgson about the comparisons with Australia. Let us look at what accident compensation costs in Australia, in terms of the rate per A$100. New Zealanders pay A$0.94; South Australians pay A$3.14; and the average Australian payment is A$1.73. In other words, our scheme costs employers about half of what Australia\u2019s scheme costs Australian employers. It surprises me, therefore, if employers are paying so little for the New Zealand scheme\u2014and I assume that they are aware of it\u2014that a Government that proposes to support and be supported by New Zealand businesses might want to go down that track and increase the levies that employers pay for their workers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThe last thing I will speak about is exactly how unfair many of the clauses in this bill are. The Hon Ruth Dyson talked about pre-accident earnings, and asking workers who were on a high income to go back to work earlier and accept a job at a lower level. They have been legitimately paying their contribution to the accident compensation scheme, and they have outgoings in their household at a certain level. They expect, under the contract that New Zealanders have with the scheme, that they will be able to come back, get the proper support, and maintain their households without being economically deprived. The pre-accident earnings clause in the bill is not fair. It is simply not fair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EGrant Robertson mentioned holiday pay. Those provisions are also grossly unfair. It means that if I fortuitously have an accident the first day back from my holidays, having used up my annual leave, I will not be penalised by having to sacrifice my holidays. But if I happen to be saving my holidays and have an accident the day before I go on holiday, I will lose those holidays to accident compensation. Holidays are a basic right of New Zealanders. That provision is mean-spirited. I contest Mr Peachey\u2019s claim that it is not mean-spirited, and that the bill will enable the scheme to be far more sustainable and affordable. It is simply not. This particular clause will save $1 million. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EAll New Zealanders are fair people. They want a fair go. They want their accident compensation to be fair. They want it to be fair on all people. They want to be able to pay a levy and know that their kids can go out and play sport, and if they have an accident, they will be compensated. They want to know that workers in high-risk occupations will be compensated in the same way that people in low-risk occupations are. Yet clause 58 of this bill, which is about holiday pay, is grossly unfair and unjust. As Mr Boscawen quite accurately said, this bill will mean that we pay more and get less. The bill simply reinforces what Mr Boscawen argued it should not do. For that reason I think it is completely right that Labour stands up and defends a scheme by which New Zealanders have entered into a social contract, and on which they depend.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u0022414dca77117346acab48556d3c20bb4e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022414dca77117346acab48556d3c20bb4e\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I appreciate being given a chance to speak further on Part 2 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. I will address two things in particular. I will pick up where I left off in my last contribution about work-related gradual process injury. There are just a couple of things I am sure that members opposite are not aware of; they may not have included them in their slash-and-burn approach to accident compensation if they were. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EWork-related gradual process injuries, and, in particular, hearing loss, were decreasing at the time that I had the privilege of holding the portfolio of the Minister for ACC. The point about that is that a range of workers have moved through their lives, and they might have started by working in a quarry or an engineering plant in the 1940s or the 1950s, when things like industrial deafness and injury through repeated exposure to noise and machinery were not as well researched or understood as they are now. Typically, people with work-related hearing loss are men in their late 50s, 60s, or 70s. They are able to trace back perfectly easily to the start of their hearing loss, which is not age-related but because of their occupation. A doctor could just look at them and ask where they worked when they started work. They might say they worked in an engineering plant or a quarry, and the doctor would know for certain that the hearing loss was work-related and that it happened gradually over time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EPeople who have benefited from receiving hearing aids have moved through the system, so the number of those appearing in recent years has been declining. One of the worrying things\u2014and this is where I want to come to my point about the 6 percent threshold on hearing loss before one is eligible for entitlements under this bill\u2014is that we were beginning to see an increase in the number of young people emerging with work-related hearing loss. I would be very interested to know if the Minister has any awareness of this data and this research, or if the Associate Minister for ACC, Pansy Wong, who is in the chair, could speak to that. The concern is that young people, particularly those working in social environments\u2014I am thinking of nightclubs and bars, where it is not \u201Ccool\u201D to wear industrial earmuffs when one is serving drinks behind a bar\u2014are exposed to continual loud music and noise. Suddenly we were beginning to see an increase in the number of young people with work-related hearing loss. This Government is now saying that those young people will have to demonstrate that they have a 6 percent or greater hearing loss before they are eligible for any entitlement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI will make another point about the hearing loss issue. One of the things that Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) did very successfully was to leverage down the cost of hearing aids. It used to be that it did not matter at what level one\u2019s hearing was impaired, and it did not matter whether it was a high-range or low-range sound that one\u2019s hearing was impaired at, audiologists would prescribe a one-size-fits-all hearing aid. Technology has moved on, and now hearing aids are devised to accommodate low-range, high-range, or mid-range sound, and can be tailored appropriately. It is true that the cost of hearing aids has escalated hugely, but it is also true that the industry was absolutely gouging the price of them. ACC was able, because of its huge size, and the number of claimants it had needing hearing aids\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u00221fc02234f2ca4b7ea01f7999786f9e84\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221fc02234f2ca4b7ea01f7999786f9e84\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u00220559d6d6ea664f85bbe3bc8f0370ac9b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220559d6d6ea664f85bbe3bc8f0370ac9b\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills):\u003C/span\u003E I will pick up the points that were started by the member who spoke before me, Maryan Street, in relation to gradual process disease and infection. The criteria and thresholds of those are dramatically altered by this Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThroughout the debate we have had what I regard as some pretty callous and cruel references to people who have been injured\u2014particularly to those who have injured themselves deliberately, and who are now disentitled under the provisions in Part 2. But I say to the Minister in the chair, Pansy Wong, and to her ministerial and backbench colleagues, that we are talking about real people. We are taking away entitlements considered by society to be fair entitlements for the loss that people have incurred because of an injury, whether or not it was self-inflicted. I think that it is time the debate in this Committee recognised the harsh reality for many families of the impacts of an injury.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EI will tell members about one such family. I know them well: Tony, Annette, Leeanna, and Sonia Gibson. I will read a statement from Tony. He said, in relation to his son Jason: \u201CJason pulled up at my place to pick up his small daughter. He opened the door to his van and he fell out on the ground. I said to him: \u2018Have you been drinking?\u2019, and he said: \u2018No, I\u2019ve been spraying the inside of tanks with two-pot paints.\u2019\u00A0\u201D Jason was 25 feet away from his father at the time, but his father could smell the toxins. He thought that Jason had paint in the van, so suggested they take it out; the van was empty. The smell of the solvents was coming because Jason had absorbed them when he was doing his painting job. Later on, not very long after that incident, Jason came to his parents\u2019 house and said that he had hay fever - like symptoms. He said that the night before he had jogged up Dyers Pass Road to the Summit Road and then his nose had started bleeding, which was quite unusual. His father suggested he go to the doctor and be tested for lead poisoning. Jason was a painter and this was a logical suggestion from his father. The next day Jason did that. He had a blood test taken. That same day, at 4 o\u2019clock, the doctor rang him and said he needed to go to hospital immediately as he had blood cancer. Six days later Jason died. He had suffered five massive brain haemorrhages directly as a result of the solvents that he had absorbed just by doing his job. Jason was 29 when he died. He left his wife Sonia without a husband and his daughter without a father. These are real people whom we are talking about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003ESonia and Annette spent 2\u00BD years researching the link between Jason\u2019s solvent absorption and his death. They passed that information on to the Department of Labour to use in health and safety promotions, and I am sure the department has taken that up. In Part 1, though, the Minister has determined that the advisory group that was set up to find out facts about tragedies such as Jason\u2019s death and how those deaths can be avoided in future\u2014to get that information from best practice internationally and to share it with the Minister\u2014is gone. We have abolished that committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThere are three people in this Chamber who seem to know more than anyone else: Aaron Gilmore, who has probably written a book on knowing more than anyone else; Michael Woodhouse, who is determined to be the Minister because he does know more than anybody else about just about any topic; and the current Minister himself, Nick Smith. In respect of the talents of all those three members, I say that when Jason died, nobody knew the relationship between his solvent absorption and his job\u2014the job that not only he did well and was very proud of but that also provided a decent income to keep his family\u2014the job he really enjoyed doing. He got up every morning, looking forward to going to his job, but the job killed him because we did not know enough in our country about the danger he was exposing himself to. In the same way, my colleague Maryan Street alluded to the dangers that people in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s exposed themselves to, in terms of the noise, chemical absorption\u2014particularly from solvents\u2014and dangers that New Zealand society just did not know about then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022 data-id=\u002243bc8efb5a3643308b0030a9f6d15000\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002243bc8efb5a3643308b0030a9f6d15000\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u2019CONNOR (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I welcome the opportunity to speak, however briefly, on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill, because this is vital legislation for the agricultural and rural sector. The issues have not been raised in this Committee, but as the previous speaker said, in Part 2 there are some real dangers with regard to unknown work-related injuries relating to poisons used in the agricultural sector during the 1950s and 1960s that have now been clearly identified as being highly toxic, but without the results of that being fully known yet. It is very, very important that people who have put their heart and soul into their jobs, and who have worked their body almost to the point of collapse to create export earnings for this country can be rightfully compensated in their old age. There will be injuries that we have yet to clearly identify. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThe principles of accident compensation must be upheld. Those principles say we are a society and a community of different occupational groups and we share risks at different levels, but it is through cooperation and the sharing of risks, experiences, and professions that we drive this country forward. This bill will divide us into little risk groups: high-risk groups of people who work on farms and in rural areas, chopping down trees, and low-risk groups of people who do the administrative work for their industries, and who sit on their chuffs in Wellington, as we do. If we allow the privatisation of accident compensation, we will see the division of this country into low and high-risk groups, and ultimately see costs and profits extracted from the very industries that drive this country and its economy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EIn the rural provincial areas, through tourism, agriculture, farming, and horticulture people take risks every single day. They work in remote areas, they work with animals, and they work with machinery in the highest-risk occupations that we have identified. Through accident compensation we take a societal and a community approach that says we must move forward together, and we must ensure that there is adequate no-faults protection for each and every worker in this country. Yes, there will be some apportionment of higher risk through the earners account and the non-earners account, and that should be so. But if we are to divide up those accounts even more and assess, as the private sector will do, the very high-risk areas, then we may see small businesses that drive this country through farming, through forestry contracting and logging, and through agricultural contracting services, being driven out the back door. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThere is a growing realisation throughout the rural sectors that the changes that this Government is making to accident compensation will undermine their viability and may see them become exposed to litigation\u2014because that is the inevitable outcome of these changes\u2014and to costs that will mean they cannot afford to employ people to do the work that is necessary. I say every New Zealander should read the Labour minority report on the bill, which clearly identifies these risks. But the Government, through blind ideology, is determined to push ahead and privatise accident compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EPart 2 deals with some of the technical issues, and speakers before me have rightfully identified the difficulties in assessing hearing loss and the long-term effects of that on any New Zealander. But there are unknown effects that will be eliminated from investigation and proper compensation by the changes that are being made here. If someone has his or her claim in now, that person will be OK, but some people do not know and have yet to make a claim.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u0022a6f6d38da5004760a90956c6dfae2def\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a6f6d38da5004760a90956c6dfae2def\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022cd90a7efbc9a4b5a9d3e81381287ddd6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cd90a7efbc9a4b5a9d3e81381287ddd6\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. This point of order does not relate to the usual point of order taken at this time to try to influence your decision. I seek some clarification about the new Standing Orders. If a member has contributed to the debate at any one point, if a member has used one of his or her four calls to debate the part, under the new rules that member is entitled to move a closure motion. There is no question about that. This member has, of course, having been a member of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, exercised that right. But this member has previously moved a closure motion, and I am unclear as to whether that pushes him over the four calls that he is entitled to, or whether he is now able to move a second closure motion, his first one not having been accepted by you, and having been participating in the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002273d11d36cb834e40910dabbccd5c7bd3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002273d11d36cb834e40910dabbccd5c7bd3\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I am advised, Mr Hughes, that a closure motion is not a call per se, so it does not affect the member\u2019s calls.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240433086b5254b58b8d4b57543f33680\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022646599a601664c2c83e4bafe53fc4f34\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I will firstly give my ruling, then come back to the member. The advice I was given has been corrected. A closure motion is a call. There is no question about that. That accords with how I understood it. My advice is that a member can move a closure motion more than once, provided that the member does not take more than four calls. There is a limit of four. I am just checking my notes, and I think that Mr Bennett has not made four calls, but I shall ask the Clerk to double-check. The Clerk and my notes concur. This is Mr Bennett\u2019s second call on Part 2. Mr Bennett has made one call previously, so he is within\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221bf0d9a879614b24b0e3ec6252911635\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: You can\u2019t trust the whips!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229323a736928c461897c0f7cfe870f43a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I am not worried about what the whips\u2019 records say. They are utterly immaterial. It is my notes that count, and no correspondence is entered into. My notes say that there have been two calls. Mr Bennett has moved a closure motion\u2014his second\u2014which he is entitled to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002273581185e21c4bfc9ba8b0bebfcdee76\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002273581185e21c4bfc9ba8b0bebfcdee76\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. This is a separate point of order, and it goes to whether a member is entitled to move the same motion twice. I can see that you are getting a nod, Mr Chairperson, but, from my understanding of the situation in the past, other members are able to move the same motion\u2014and this is not something restricted to a closure motion; it is something that is general\u2014but a member having moved a motion once and having had it rejected by the Committee, I question whether that member is allowed to move exactly the same motion again. I want to add one other point here, as to whether the closure motion was appropriately moved, because, as you are aware, one is not allowed to add words to the motion. After the member had received the call he said the words \u201CMr Chair\u201D. He had the call\u2014he had called for it, he had called \u201CMr Chair\u201D, and you gave him the call\u2014and he said \u201CMr Chair\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0931d5b144d412cabdccbbf95ec1177\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: He said \u201CThank you, Mr Chair.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd259dec8a644bcdb7a32e218abf60b0\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I did not quite hear \u201Cthank you\u201D but he certainly said \u201CMr Chair\u201D. I am advised from behind that he said \u201Cthank you\u201D; I heard the \u201CMr Chair\u201D. My question is whether those are additional words that obviate his ability to move a motion in the proper form.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002293311013d5854ab0874b9d9e46208f38\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293311013d5854ab0874b9d9e46208f38\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member makes three points. Firstly, he claims that the motion moved by Mr Bennett was rejected by the Committee. That is not correct. The motion was not accepted by the Chair. That does not mean it was rejected by the Committee. It was the Chair\u2019s decision. Secondly, Mr Mallard raised a point about the manner in which the question was framed\u2014Mr Bennett\u2019s putting in the words \u201CMr Chair\u201D. I think that is a matter of courtesy and respect, and I would not knock out a closure motion for that. If a member thanked the Chair for listening to his point of order, again I think that is being courteous, and I would not discount a member\u2019s motion for good manners. Good manners should be encouraged by everybody. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question is that the question be now put. I will put the question, because we have had 2 hours and 40 minutes on Part 2, which is a rather technical part, and I think we have had a very good debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae212cf51bf94eddbe0b1229949a5a5f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae212cf51bf94eddbe0b1229949a5a5f\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. My point of order is only to give notice that it is my intention to recall the Speaker on that, but my colleague Mr Hughes has another point that he would like to deal with, just in case both of them can be dealt with by the Speaker at the same time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u002217510e4dd1794e4996d8e4456b59aa72\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002217510e4dd1794e4996d8e4456b59aa72\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I am grateful to my colleague Mr Mallard for giving me the opportunity to put this point of order to you now in order to save time, because we are still in the Committee of the whole House and his matter is a separate one. My point of order goes to Speaker\u2019s ruling 7/1 in relation to seating and the attendance of members in the Chamber, and it particularly refers to an item brought before the House in 2003 by Mr Dunne, the member for \u014Chariu, in respect of the positioning of members of Parliament when moving motions in the Chamber. Matters of seating in the Chamber are at the discretion of the party leader, and in most cases are delegated to the party whip, but Mr Dunne raised a point of order during the debate on the Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill that challenged the ability of members of Parliament to move a closure motion from a seat other than that which had been allocated to the individual member. Mr Bennett is not normally allocated the junior Government whip\u2019s seat, or, indeed, a seat anywhere near the executive seats. That is not where his seat in the Chamber is. [Interruption] I do not say that to be unfair or unkind; I am just making the observation that his seat\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f3d703121274b49816b07a3f2778ad2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Points of order will be heard in silence, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286e1bbb1d1a84481bb72a9b4c844cd4c\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry; I did not mean to cast aspersions on the member in any way. I am saying that for members to move a closure motion, they should be seated in their own allocated seat, as Mr Dunne pointed out in 2003, and I ask you, Mr Chairperson, to rule on whether it was appropriate for you to accept the closure motion from that member, given that he was not in his seat. I believe that Mr Tremain had not exhausted all four of his calls and would be in a position to move a closure motion. The Hon Mrs Collins is seated in her correct seat; she would be able to move a closure motion. Te Ururoa Flavell is always extremely helpful to National, and I am sure he would be able to do so. Mr Garrett is an entirely different matter, but everyone else could have assisted in that respect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00225428d15a2ded463b9f0d48931a1471e9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225428d15a2ded463b9f0d48931a1471e9\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I come to the point of the member\u2019s point of order. His contention was that a member of this House can undertake the functions of this House only from his or her allocated seat. If that were accepted as a legitimate point of order, I think it would have implications well beyond this matter, and I will come back to that in a moment. Firstly, I think it is the custom and the practice for members to move about the Chamber and sit in other seats to conduct their business. Very often both Labour and National members give speeches from seats that are not theirs. The Chair always recognises them and accepts their speeches from there. The chief Opposition whip well knows that from time to time the whips\u2019 seats in the Opposition are vacated and neither of the whips sits there, and other members cast votes on behalf of their particular party. If the member\u2019s point of order was to be accepted, it would mean that on no occasion could the Chair accept a party vote from the Labour Opposition if anybody other than the whip was sitting in the whip\u2019s seat. Of course, that is a nonsense. No one would accept that. I think the custom is that people are able to move motions and speak from other seats, and I have no intention of disturbing that custom. I rule that it is perfectly in order for Mr Bennett to move a closure motion from a seat other than his own. Mr Mallard has given notice of a point of order. Are we ready to go?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00220421c7ce9c3e4a8d882a2ff0e1eda0e3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220421c7ce9c3e4a8d882a2ff0e1eda0e3\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I move that the debate do now adjourn in order to get a considered ruling from the Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb4d926247c547c8a9ad2a93d7827256\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Speaker be recalled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225063a5002e6247fb8538745d21194b40\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: No, that the Committee do now adjourn in order to get a considered ruling from the Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a741e27f87fb464aa871dc5c5e57ca22\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I think there is a technical fault with the member\u2019s resolution.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c0e7fc209bd9477bb413fe48575f707a\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: It was a good go, though.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236a986f5770443b8b5f4682c924a1b5a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The point is that the Committee cannot adjourn. If the member wishes to move that the Speaker be recalled because of a dispute over the Chair\u2019s rulings, he is perfectly entitled to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222834e96c52064e018cdef51486c0d24c\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I would like to do both. You could start with the first one, we will have a vote on that, then I will move the second one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f68bb4a70844c72bddd990417373fa8\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: There are lots of things we would all like to do. I would like to have Christmas every day of the year and receive gifts, but that is not the way life is. I ask Mr Mallard whether he wishes to have the Speaker recalled; if so, he should move that and I will put it to the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f2c87def41546d3b77d4da4fc169122\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I move, That the Chairperson report progress to obtain the Speaker\u2019s ruling on the Chairperson\u2019s acceptance of a closure motion on the question, That Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u00228f3ad98ed8634ba68dfe774610b9ec0f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228f3ad98ed8634ba68dfe774610b9ec0f\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I understand that if a vote is called for, we have the right to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270765a4ad6174099805801e96ebe2d5e\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: You didn\u2019t call for a vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229a0a42739c54076bbc0ce69c11b4bca\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN\u003C/span\u003E: I said \u201CNo\u201D, but the Chair said that the motion had been moved.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d98d22a953348e3ba0d1a37f9223520\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It had been carried.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a57fde1de77a47a480de8b409fe5fffe\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I call for a party vote, then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002251cdd873acbe4fb18a928dac2ee5ef01\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002251cdd873acbe4fb18a928dac2ee5ef01\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to say two points to the member about this. It is one of the conventions of this House that if a party wants the Speaker to be recalled, members support that. If the member seriously wished to challenge it, he should have called for a party vote and disputed it. The member did not; he just said he was opposed, and I took it at that. The member was required to take the next step and say: \u201CParty vote called for.\u201D; the member did not. I then said that the Speaker was recalled; the Speaker has been recalled. End of story.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225d1f0470064b4e2381b39bc965079b5e\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002283bea29ec1c04b6996754bf21ec7fa2c\u0022\u003ESpeaker Recalled\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00223f434920a43540a6a5f3ec683e780cf4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223f434920a43540a6a5f3ec683e780cf4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, we have had 2 hours and 40 minutes of debate on Part 2. National for the third time moved a closure motion, which I was about to accept. The Opposition members, sensing the mood of the Chair, decided to raise a number of points of order, and as a consequence of the rulings I gave on their points of order they wish to dispute my decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EOne point of order was about the place of Mr Bennett, who stood to move the closure from a seat other than his own. The Opposition claimed that Mr Bennett could not move a closure motion from a seat other than his own. I ruled that a member could, for two reasons: firstly, the convention is generally in this House that people can move about and give speeches from various places other than their actual allocated seat; and, secondly, Mr Bennett was in one of the whips\u2019 chairs, and it is not unusual for both party whips to be out of the Chamber and for another party member to conduct the party vote, and to do so from a whip\u2019s chair. Without that practice, it would be a very difficult situation; a member would have to retreat to his or her seat in the Chamber and then start to cast the party vote. That has never been the practice, and I felt that in this particular situation the convention was well established, no one had disputed it, and I was perfectly happy for Mr Bennett to move his motion from the whip\u2019s chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe second point of order that was raised was that Mr Bennett had prefaced his motion with \u201CMr Chair\u201D. After having called \u201CMr Chair\u201D and being given the call, he said: \u201CMr Chair, I move that the question be now put.\u201D\u2014and then said some other words\u2014\u201CMr Chair, thank you.\u201D The contention from the Opposition is that by adding those words Mr Bennett had changed the nature of the resolution, and was therefore not strictly compliant with the rules set down in the Standing Orders. I have ruled that Mr Bennett\u2019s being courteous in addressing the Chair appropriately and in thanking the Chair was to be applauded, and I was not going to rule against him on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe third point of order is that Mr Bennett had moved the motion previously. Mr Bennett is entitled to four calls. He had moved one closure motion before; I had declined to accept the closure motion. He then took a second call and moved the closure motion for the second time. That complies with the rules, in that he is entitled to four speeches. Each closure motion is a speech; therefore, he had used only two calls, and he was entitled to two further speeches.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EBut I think the more pointed point being made by the Opposition is that Mr Bennett, having moved a motion previously and having been declined, is not entitled to move a second motion. I think the general view that the Opposition would put forward is that if a member moves a motion, and the House declines that motion, the member is not able to bring that motion back to the House a second time within a period of 12 months\u2014that is my recollection of the Standing Orders. I responded to the point of order from the Hon Trevor Mallard by saying that the first closure motion by Mr Bennett had not been rejected by the Committee; it had been rejected by the Chair. I in the Chair did not accept it. Therefore the Committee did not have the opportunity to consider the closure motion and to accept or reject it. It was not a decision of the Committee; it was a decision of the Chair. I felt at that particular time that a number of other speakers in the Chamber were indicating that they wished to speak, and to be fair I wanted to give them that opportunity. Once they had spoken, I felt it was time to accept the closure motion and test the will of the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThat is my recollection of it, and I am happy with all the rulings I have made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022163f6485c8674b338d5a1523faf917bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022163f6485c8674b338d5a1523faf917bc\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I thank the Chair; I think it was a good summary of the facts. It is not my intention to take up either the first or the third point of order with you, Mr Speaker, although my colleagues may. The reason I asked for you to be recalled relates to a very narrow question on which there is considerable precedent. It goes to whether, when people are invited to move a closure, they are allowed to add words. As the Chair has indicated, words were added. I have had experience in the past of closure motions that I have moved being ruled out because I had thanked the Chair for giving me the call. Moana Mackey has indicated that she\u2014obviously, in much more recent times; I made my mistakes in this area a long time ago\u2014when Mr Hunt was Speaker, had a closure motion ruled out because of her adding a courtesy before moving it, and therefore being held not to have used the strict form.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI know the current Chair is a stickler for courtesy, and he thinks it is very important; generally, I accept that it is important for the House. However, there is longstanding precedent on this particular issue that nothing\u2014nothing\u2014should be added to the closure motion, because when something is added to the closure motion it changes it from being a closure motion to being a speech. That is the difference: a member cannot speak and then move a closure motion as part of the same call. If one makes a speech, one has to get the call on a separate occasion in order to move the closure motion. It is a relatively simple thing. I am not criticising Mr Bennett for being polite, but just saying that in this particular case his form of the closure motion meant that his moving of it was not within the strict rules. Certainly, the precedents that I am aware of have all been in that direction; certainly, I and Ms Mackey have had closure motions ruled out for exactly the same thing\u2014for thanking the Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EMy request to you, Mr Speaker, is on that point. I will leave it there, because I do not want to argue the positioning point of order, which I happen to disagree with, but there is clearly a differing view on it, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u00226356a4336bb74148ab51caaf268f0df9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226356a4336bb74148ab51caaf268f0df9\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I think a point of clarification is important in reaching a ruling here. The words that were used were simply \u201CMr Chair\u201D; there were no other words, and no thankyous. Those words were used at that point in time, when there was some noise in the Chamber, to make clear that the closure motion was read exactly as it should have been, following the words \u201CMr Chair\u201D. The second point I make is that in reading through the Standing Orders, I see that at no point do they state that adding other words disqualifies the closure motion, and, as a result, I believe that what was said was in keeping with the Standing Orders and the Speakers\u2019 rulings, and that the closure motion should have been accepted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022a32212e17718443db0cf6ae705469238\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a32212e17718443db0cf6ae705469238\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Speaking to the point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256f73dc4cf1249c0a18f6c7ac0657418\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I will hear the Hon Darren Hughes briefly, and that will be the end of the matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264492f6ef26b46cf92102d71a0289639\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Certainly, Mr Speaker. I will address just two very quick points that the Chair reported back to you. One was the ability of members located in seats other than those they have been individually allocated to move a closure motion, which had been a matter contested previously. The member was speaking from a block of seats allocated to his party but not his individual seat. The Chair has ruled on that and given you his explanation. There was also a question on the third point the Chair raised with you about the ability of a member, under the new rules, to move multiple closure motions within his or her allocation of four calls. The closure motion is treated as a call. Members can move up to the maximum number of calls\u2014four\u2014but it is treated as a speech. There was a question, which was not answered by the Chair, as to what happens in the case where there has been a mixture of calls\u2014that is, a member participates substantively in the debate, using one of his or her calls as a speech to discuss the substance of the legislation, then uses subsequent calls on a procedural matter in respect of a closure motion. It would be useful to get some clear guidance from you on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EOn the second point, the middle point, which Mr Mallard has spoken to you about, he recalled his own experience, and Ms Mackey has offered hers through him. In fact, this very point occurred early in the term of this Parliament, when we were in urgency before Christmas 2008 and members were unable to get the correct form of words to put the closure motion. All of those motions were not accepted by each of the three Chairs in the debate. That was quite a feature of what happened at that point. The reason why I think it is important is that Standing Order 132(1) is one of the few Standing Orders where the precise form of words is prescribed in quotation marks for members of the House to follow. As it happens, there are two examples on that page, the other one being Standing Order 129(1) on adjournment of debate, which Mr Mallard referred to earlier. There are very few motions where the exact form of words is prescribed for us to follow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EMr Speaker, I think that if you uphold what the Chair has said, that will overturn what has been a longstanding practice that members, sadly, have to learn the hard way. It has happened to nearly everybody\u2014not getting the form of words right. Members say either \u201CThank you.\u201D or \u201CFinally, I\u2019ve been called.\u201D, or some other quite innocent phrase is used, but at the point that those very tight words in Standing Order 132 are not used it becomes a speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EFinally, there appears to be some disagreement. The contribution of the chief Government whip indicated that he did not believe that Mr Bennett had used extra words. Of course, that is a matter of debate, because that is certainly what was heard on this side of the Chamber. The Chair himself in reporting to you, Mr Speaker, said that one of the reasons he had accepted the closure motion was that the member had used a courtesy. As nice and kind as that is, it is not what is permitted under Standing Order 132. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u0022a71a0558fba94d9884bdb853b12fc397\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a71a0558fba94d9884bdb853b12fc397\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank honourable members. Let me preface my ruling by pointing out Speaker\u2019s ruling 65/4, which states that it is not for the Speaker to second-guess the Chair\u2019s judgment on a closure motion. I make that point at the start, because I will not make any comment in respect of the acceptance of the closure motion. That is solely the judgment of the Chair. I do want, though, to address quickly the technical issues leading up to that acceptance that members have raised. The first one is the question of whether a member can move the closure from a seat that is not the member\u2019s allocated seat. There is nothing in the Standing Orders that prevents a member from doing that. As the Chair pointed out to the Committee at some length, there is nothing that prevents that, and members are well aware that the House would not work very effectively if everyone had to run back to his or her own seat before being able to do such things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIn respect of the second point on the actual words used, from what I understand took place the member moved that the question be now put in the correct form, as required by Standing Order 132(1). The Chair at the time accepted that. I think from what I have heard that there is no reason for me to rule that it was in any way out of order. To suggest that to say thank you is to make a speech is a little unfortunate. Courtesy in this House is something I have been trying to encourage. Having said that, I think it is worthwhile that members have raised the point. Members do need to be aware when moving the closure motion that there is a proper form and that it should be used. I am not in any way criticising members for raising the point, but I think the ruling of the Chair is absolutely proper on this occasion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIn respect of the third point about whether the member was entitled to move the closure motion, given that he had already had a call, the Standing Orders make it very clear that a member can make a number of calls and can move the closure in any of those calls, as long as the Committee has not already made a decision on the matter. I will hand back to the Chair at that point, having clarified that point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022824ea4e77dd14a1a9cd5594a37d9e034\u0022\u003EPoints of Order\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229bc191d3d82d49f58dc02706f8afe19b\u0022\u003EQuestion Time\u2014Leave to Hold in Urgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022b0842ac592e94112a61a9811872c3488\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b0842ac592e94112a61a9811872c3488\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It is a completely separate point of order, but we need to do this now because you are here and we will not be seeing you for a while. I seek leave for there to be a question time at 2 p.m. today, with all questions being lodged with the Office of the Clerk by 12.30 p.m. today. Otherwise there will be no question time until 17 March, and no chance for the public to have Ministers called to account. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a75f4eeda1b44ff8f266d9a3a4b6662\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A member has, under a point of order, sought leave that a question time be held today under the conditions the member has outlined. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d006579e96474e92ac798521cc6850ae\u0022\u003EInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222484d5eb348944ea94515f256ac599fd\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000283\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eb534f62084a460a8ecaf59a76516454\u0022\u003EPart 2  Miscellaneous provisions (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022722dd674ac764bb7bd3a9d685b5cce00\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022722dd674ac764bb7bd3a9d685b5cce00\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e2f9a2faabac4baaa97135928834d506\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000286\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 63, Noes 58.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000287\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to Part 2 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229bf8cda8c78a46aebf5d4ffa2518db13\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002280434448aef644b59381b67ab0e2e28c\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002226d20706da574ea88827fd48094d40fa\u0022\u003ENew Part 3  Requirement to undertake annual reviews of impact of various changes\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00225060e3474c024a24bfb87eb7ac03a8cf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225060e3474c024a24bfb87eb7ac03a8cf\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: We now come to a typescript amendment in the name of the Hon David Parker to insert new Part 3. I call the Hon David Parker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u0022d4ed40ec1fa148e5996a624db752b44d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d4ed40ec1fa148e5996a624db752b44d\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you, Mr Chairperson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022378efba0108f4bcf98e9b992965074e8\u0022\u003EChris Tremain\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. This is an amendment. It is not a debatable motion, I understand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224fc6e790860a46419c56a72add8f8b3b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I hear any more, I will take some advice from the Clerk. I will refresh the situation. The Hon David Parker has an amendment to insert a new part. The Clerk advises me that because the amendment inserts a new part it is a separate question and therefore is debatable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200fee1f62ec448399b786c6028dc94c8\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: New Part 3, which I and the Labour Party are urging Parliament to vote for, puts a requirement on the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) to conduct an annual review of the effect of the amendment bill on injured people. We know that this amendment bill significantly cuts the entitlements of people who are injured. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EMost people in New Zealand never suffer a serious injury that has them off work long term, thankfully. So, thankfully, most of us never experience the consequences of having a long-term injury and all the bad things that flow from that, including loss of work, pain, lost opportunities, and constrained abilities to do other things that one used to do before one\u2019s accident. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EWhen we change the rules in fundamental ways\u2014which is what the changes in this bill do\u2014the impact of that on real people must be considered. During the debate on other parts we heard about the change whereby someone is deemed to be vocationally able and therefore is pushed off the scheme. But it is important that we recall that just because someone is deemed to be vocationally independent because in theory the person could work at some job for 30 hours per week, it does not mean to say that he or she will get a job. It is absolutely clear that the \u201Creturn to work following injury\u201D rules under this scheme are already tough. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EIn the minority report of the Labour members of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee we referred to a published study that was undertaken by Hazel Armstrong and published in the New Zealand Law Review. It showed that even under current rules, which are made tougher by this legislation, people who were deemed ready for work and therefore were pushed off the scheme, did not always get work. Indeed, after quite a significant period the majority of them were still not in full-time work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EIn fact, the study found that of those who were found to be vocationally independent and therefore pushed off the scheme, only 32 percent of those who were deemed \u201Cwork ready\u201D had obtained full-time employment; 21 percent were in part-time employment; 22 percent were on a Work and Income benefit; and 10 percent were not working at all and were on no benefit, probably because the person\u2019s partner was of an income that meant the person was not eligible for any other benefit; and 9 percent remained on weekly compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003ESo the vast majority of long-term injury sufferers did not go back into full-time work after being exited from the scheme. We want to see how this legislation plays out in terms of making the situation even harder on those long-term injured people. We want those additional costs to be assessed by ACC, because the reality is that these changes do not cause costs, following injury, to go away; they just move them on to the injured person. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EIt is not as though, all of a sudden, pushing those people off the scheme means they are miraculously cured. All it means is that they are no longer getting accident compensation. They are no longer entitled to further rehabilitation treatment. The person could have been in quite a well-paid occupation, maybe a technical occupation, and could be rehabilitated to the stage where he or she could stack shelves in a supermarket and then be pushed off the scheme and get no further assistance towards being rehabilitated to the point of being able to carry out his or her former job. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThe person may, for example, have been a labourer or a builder who was being paid more. After such a person is pushed off the scheme, he or she does not get any further physiotherapy, or other services, or orthopaedic interventions to help him or her to get well enough to do their prior occupation. So, effectively, the cost of that rehabilitation either cannot be afforded or is paid for by the injured person. Those effects, in the opinion of the Labour Party, ought to be assessed and reported upon. That is why I put forward new Part 3 in the hope that the Committee will support it. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u00225487a1c2208f4bdd9691c2e6cdd9f95c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225487a1c2208f4bdd9691c2e6cdd9f95c\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u00223702bd98b5af49cf88abe607f1b6e8dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223702bd98b5af49cf88abe607f1b6e8dd\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to get a call, albeit under urgency, for a bill that the Labour Party does oppose, and that is why we are putting forward new Part 3. When legislation is done in urgency, when it is rushed through the political process, and when the Government is not listening to what people are saying, then that is the very time that reviews are so important. When legislation is made in haste; when it is not being considered seriously, deliberately, and using the normal process, that is the very time when what the House calls unintended consequences occur. There could be no more serious time for unintended consequences to occur than when they affect some of the most vulnerable in our society, and that is people who have been injured. Often, or mostly, they are injured through no fault of their own. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI hope the Committee will seriously consider new Part 3. We know of a policy change made in the area of sensitive claims under the accident compensation scheme. It has not been a legislative change made by the National Government but a change to the practice of how people with sensitive claims are treated. It has not even been a legislative change but the numbers are horrific in terms of the people who are no longer getting treatment for that very important issue. For example, in the area that I come from, Hamilton in the Waikato, the number of sensitive claims that has been accepted by ACC has reduced in the order of 70 percent. So 70 percent more of those people in our community are wandering around, without the counselling help they need, after having suffered serious sexual abuse. That is an example of the sorts of numbers affected through just a simple policy change that has happened under the National Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThis bill makes legislative changes that will have serious consequences for people who suffer hearing loss through their work. It will have serious implications for the families of people who have committed suicide, or perhaps people who have attempted suicide themselves. We do not know what the impact of these legislative changes will be. I have heard no information coming from the Government on any research or any evidence that it has been able to put before the Committee to say what the impact of these changes will be. So under urgency, into the unknown, goes this Government, once again, with the most vulnerable in our society. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EYet I hope Government members pick up this opportunity to say that they are only human, that maybe they have not got this right, and, therefore, that they would like to take up the Hon David Parker\u2019s proposal to review what the impact of these changes has been annually, not only in 12 months\u2019 time, but also in another 12 months\u2019 time and then annually thereafter\u2014assuming that this very bad legislation goes ahead and that all those on the Government benches still go ahead and vote for this bill even though some Government members, and this has been quite obvious from their speeches over the course of the last 24 hours, do not actually understand what they are voting for. It is the strong contention of members on this side of the Chamber that, because of the very vulnerable nature of the people being considered here and of the way in which their rights are being retrenched under this legislation, we need not only a one-off annual review but also continual annual reviews. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe nature of hearing loss, in particular, is that it is not immediately obvious what the impact is for the people who are affected by it. Hearing loss is one of those things that happens gradually over a period of time, and often people do not even realise when they first start suffering occupational hearing loss that it is, in fact, happening to them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EBefore I was elected to Parliament, the job that I undertook was training health and safety reps in the workplace. So I am absolutely appalled that this legislation is going through, because I heard the stories every day of my working life before I came into this place about the impact on not only working people but also their families and workmates when things go wrong at work. These are not isolated situations. If anyone in this Chamber were to get a group together of 25 randomly selected New Zealanders in a room, then he or she would find that every single one of those people has had some claim before the Accident Compensation Corporation at some stage in their life. That is how all-encompassing this issue is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022 data-id=\u002259c1a6fbf6f94c3182839e057724276a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259c1a6fbf6f94c3182839e057724276a\u0022\u003EKEVIN HAGUE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to take a call on this proposed new Part 3 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. The principle of reviewing legislation that comes in to do something experimental or something unexpected to legislation is an extremely sound one, and I think that David Parker has proposed a great addition to this bill. It would be fair to say that pretty well every submitter and, indeed, officials at the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee accepted that some of the changes that the bill introduced to the operation of the accident compensation scheme did not change the actual cost of rehabilitation or of compensation, but shifted where that cost fell. In particular, they shifted the cost of rehabilitation from accidents and injuries away from Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) and towards other Government agencies\u2014the Ministry of Health in some cases, and the Ministry of Social Development and Work and Income in some other cases. But most particularly\u2014which is for us, I guess, most concerning\u2014the legislation shifts costs away from the State and back to injured persons and their families. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThat shift is a fundamental worry and concern for the Green Party. I spoke yesterday about our commitment and support for the social contract that lies at the very heart of the accident compensation scheme, in which New Zealanders gave up their right to sue in return for a 24/7, no-fault scheme that would provide full compensation and full rehabilitation, based on the principles that were outlined in the Woodhouse report. The criticism of this bill that has come from the Green Party has been that those principles have been nibbled away at. Those principles, including full rehabilitation and real compensation, are ones that have been eroded by this bill. Therefore, the cost shifting on to injured people, the re-victimisation of the injured, is of fundamental concern. But right now, we are unable to quantify that. We do not know how big that impact is. So the idea of having an annual review is of fundamental importance since, as Sue Moroney said, in passing this bill under urgency\u2014as I am certain that this House will do, unless Government benches are struck with a bolt of enlightenment in the next day or so\u2014there is the very real possibility of unanticipated and unquantified impacts on injured people. A review provision is a sensible one for any legislation, but particularly so for this legislation, which so fundamentally changes the relationship between citizens and the State. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u002252d9f2439bff452191248610fcdbf2e2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002252d9f2439bff452191248610fcdbf2e2\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills):\u003C/span\u003E I know that the competition is pretty fierce at the moment, Mr Chairman, so I appreciate your giving me the opportunity to take a call in supporting David Parker\u2019s amendment to insert a new Part 3 in this Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. My colleague Kevin Hague from the Green Party, who has just resumed his seat, put it extraordinarily well when he said that it was good practice to review a major change in legislation, like this one, that could potentially have such a huge and negative impact on the citizens of New Zealand. That is what this debate is about. For me, this amendment is about National and ACT putting their money where their mouths are, because every one of the National speakers\u2014sorry, both of the National speakers\u2014in this debate have said that our concerns are unjustified and that this will be a robust scheme under which injured workers will be treated fairly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EWell, that is not true. Under the amendments that we have been debating for the last little while in the Committee, injured workers, injured children, and injured elderly people will be treated unfairly, because this legislation takes away the framework of their entitlement, which had been restored to fairness. So David Parker\u2019s amendment proposes that we put that debate to the test, when we have some facts to weigh up as to whether Labour and the Green Party are right. Our two parties share concerns about cost shifting, about people being moved off accident compensation and on to a benefit, and, if people are married to income earners, about their having no income at all. We are concerned about people being denied support for hearing aids because they have only 5.9 percent hearing loss. We are concerned about the families of people who have committed suicide. Their families are left not only devastated by the loss of that family member but also without any financial support from the Accident Compensation Corporation, because suddenly this House has made a value judgment about somebody who is supposed to be \u201Cbad\u201D having committing suicide\u2014rather than recognising that the person was overwhelmed by their life\u2014as opposed to someone who is, I guess, a \u201Cworthy\u201D person and who has died by some other means. That is what this debate is about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EWho is right about this matter? I ask whether the costs will be shifted, not into some magical savings bucket, but from the corporation to individuals who have been injured, and to their families. I ask whether people who have a hearing loss will have to do without the essential support they need in order to be able to hear\u2014that is, do without the basics of a hearing aid\u2014unless they can afford to buy it for themselves. Will people who are not able to work, who are not fit to go back to their old job, let alone take any other job, just be pushed off accident compensation and have no financial support at all? Those are the questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EIf the Government had any confidence at all in its words, then it would say yes to this amendment, because the amendment states that we should get the facts of the situation in 12 months\u2019 time so that we can see how injured people are being treated. Let us see where the costs of injury are falling, and let us look at the effects on society of the amendments that we have just put through under Part 1 and Part 2. Then we will be able to say who was right and who was wrong. If National members had any confidence in the words of their Minister Nick Smith, then they would say yes to this amendment, but if I were them, I would not back Nick Smith. I am a little on their side; I would be inclined to say that Nick Smith is probably leading them down the garden path and is not saying anything of substance, let alone the truth, in this debate. So it is a high risk for members opposite to back Nick Smith.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EIt is a high risk for National to say that it will put this legislation to the test when it has some actual facts. That is why I predict that National and ACT will vote against this amendment. I cannot say that those members are chicken or scared; that is not appropriate language to use. But I can say that they do not have the confidence to back this amendment, which would put their debate to a test based on facts. That is exactly what this amendment does. It is important, when we have Parliament divided on such an important issue, that we are able to review the facts. I remember Kevin Hague\u2019s predecessor, Sue Bradford, coming to me when I was the Minister for ACC and saying that she thought that a lot of people were being turfed off accident compensation and being put on to a benefit. Without the facts of the situation, nobody will be able to say who is correct in this debate, let alone say what to do about it, so I urge support for this amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u002228770c42155d444a9b966fb8be7746b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002228770c42155d444a9b966fb8be7746b7\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u0022379728f640444400a05fc4644c088009\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022379728f640444400a05fc4644c088009\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you, Mr Chair. How impolite of the previous member, David Bennett, not to thank the Chair for giving him the call after the Speaker\u2019s ruling that we had.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI am very happy to talk to new Part 3 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. In the debate on Parts 1 and 2, National members said that Labour members were scaremongering, and that what we said we were afraid was going to happen would never happen. Well, here is where the rubber hits the road. If National members truly believe that the changes they are making are benign in terms of the effects on some of our most vulnerable citizens, then let us have a review after a year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI will speak about clause 60(2) in new Part 3, on which no member has yet spoken. It requires that at the end of a review period the \u201CMinister for Accident Compensation must present a copy of any report provided under this section to the House of Representatives as soon as practicable after receiving it.\u201D This is a very important part of new Part 3. It closes the loop of accountability that has so far been missing when we are talking about the Minister for ACC.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003ESometimes Government members have been very flippant and have made jokes about the kinds of things that Labour members and Green members have raised in this debate. They have been sniggering, and they have been joking about us. But the fact is that the decisions we make in here, no matter how lightly they are taken by the Government, have huge repercussions out in the community. The Minister for ACC should be held responsible for any impact as a result of this legislation. The accountability for any repercussions should lie with the Government, but first and foremost it should lie firmly with the Minister for ACC.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWhat is so important about subclause (2) put up by the Labour member David Parker, our spokesperson on accident compensation, is that it firmly places accountability for those changes at the Minister\u2019s door. If the Minister is prepared to make those changes, if he is prepared to say to workers that just because they had not taken their holidays before they were unlucky enough to have an accident, they lose them, if he is prepared to say to people who have a significant hearing loss that they no longer qualify for a hearing aid, because that is what is done in Australia\u2014which actually is not true\u2014if he is prepared to say that not a single New Zealander will be worse off, despite the fact that New Zealanders will be paying more for accident compensation under his changes, then he should have to come to this House with a report and publicly take ownership of those repercussions. I do not think that Nick Smith and the National Party will be prepared to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe ACT Party claims that it is a party about accountability. I hope the ACT Party will vote for a review clause and will be prepared to say that it is not scared of the changes it is voting for. The ACT Party vote will put this legislation through the House under urgency. I hope the ACT Party has the courage to stand in this Chamber and say that it is not scared of a review clause and what that review process will uncover about this Government\u2019s changes. I sincerely hope the ACT Party will vote for this review clause. It will still be terrible legislation, but at least taxpayers will know that the Government has to be held accountable for the changes it makes, and the Government will be made aware of the impacts of the changes it is making. National members cannot blissfully go about their lives bouncing from cloud to cloud unaware of what happens to people on the ground who are being denied accident compensation as a result of this legislation. These changes are significant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWhere are the great defenders of property rights now, when workers are having their holidays taken off them? Those are pre-injury earnings. Workers have earned their holidays. They own them. It is not something that they get when they decide to take a holiday; it is something they get as they work. National, which claims to be the great defender of property rights, says that the holidays of those people should be taken off them\u2014after they have earned them. If people are lucky enough to take their holidays before their accident, they will be fine and will still get accident compensation. But if people have their accident before they take their holidays, they will lose their holidays. They will not get accident compensation, because they have their holiday pay. How is that fair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThose are the very issues that Labour and Green members, and I hope ACT and M\u0101ori Party members, will be supporting by voting for Part 3. If what I have claimed is not going to happen, and if I am just scaremongering\u2014and not a single National member has stood up to make me feel any better and tell me that I am wrong\u2014then members opposite should vote for this part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u00225ee72c42075241c491a479344c4b8aca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ee72c42075241c491a479344c4b8aca\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u0022a50b983b172840eca4c2c7d9d259b63e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a50b983b172840eca4c2c7d9d259b63e\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Labour\u2014Dunedin North):\u003C/span\u003E I have a question for the Government and it is this: is there anything to be scared of in Labour\u2019s proposed new Part 3 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill? New Part 3 proposes annual assessment of the impact of the cuts on, for example, how many people receiving treatment are pushed over into the health system. Is there anything about that assessment that the Government is scared of? If there is nothing that concerns the Government about the part proposed by my colleague the Hon David Parker, then it should logically just vote for it. Government members are not even speaking for it or against it. All we have had from Government members is a motion to close the debate. This is a debating chamber. The idea of a debating chamber is to debate. We have had nothing come forward\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b52bf6660b2c4c409805c84688833ac4\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Is there a Minister in the chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3fd54d77da7432f9b90ad3b41176301\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: There is a Minister in the chair. That Minister, Pansy Wong, is able take a call ahead of any other member in this Chamber simply by standing. If the Minister wanted to stand now, I would yield at this moment. From the Minister we have had not a twitching muscle, and from any member sitting on the Government benches we have had not a twitching muscle, yet the idea put forward by the Hon David Parker is an idea that is worthy of some debate. Why do the Government members not get up and say that it is a good idea? Why do they not get up and say that it is a bad idea? Is there anything wrong with the idea of requiring the Government of the day to see whether its law changes have worked, and to see whether its law changes have worked in this, that, and the other way, as laid out in the new Part 3 amendment put together by the Hon David Parker? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EIf the Government members think that there will be no cost shifting on to the health system or on to the individual, and that there will be nothing to review, then let them get up and say that. If they think that some cost shifting on to the health system is tolerable or desirable, and some cost shifting on to the individual who has had the accident or the injury is tolerable or desirable, let them get up and say that. This is a debating chamber, and saying nothing speaks volumes. It says that the Government not only has decided to stop question time in the Chamber this day but is not prepared to debate its own legislation in the Chamber this day. That tells me that the Government does not seek to defend its position. If the Government does not seek to defend its position, why would any member of the Government vote for its position? There is something going on here that is not very open and not very transparent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f2b282cf7a7e4c99af313f3d8496087c\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: The \u201CHollow Men\u201D set it all up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217437518b1d641bfaf86c3821b448e93\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: The \u201CHollow Men\u201D set it all up. I am afraid I have been in the House long enough to remember when the Rt Hon Bill Birch did this last time. I would like to tell members what happened at my electorate office in Albany Street, Dunedin North. Many people who had been denied accident compensation and who felt they should not have been denied it came in. Some of them were distressed; in fact, most of them were distressed. They not only were distressed about their own position\u2014the fact that their households were short of money, or whatever the situation was\u2014but were distressed in another sense. They were distressed that their Government had let them down at the point when they least needed to be let down. So we found ourselves inundated with cases. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EOne of my staff developed a speciality in accident compensation. I remember coming to work one Saturday morning and finding this staff member at work. I asked him what he was doing there so early. He said that he had not been home, and he had been working on accident compensation cases through the night. I told him that he was not allowed to do that; in fact, it was a sackable offence. I put it in writing for him that he may not work through the night. That happened in Dunedin North when National last decided that accident compensation would be for some people but not for others, that accident compensation would have this, that, or the other constraint put upon it of an arbitrary nature, that accident compensation would be part of a scheme, and not a proper scheme, that it would be some-fault, not no-fault. That is what happened last time and people kept coming to us forever.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EOne gentleman still comes back. He has long since been thrown off accident compensation. In fact, he has been to jail and back in the meantime. He comes back because his life is broken. This gentleman went mad with pain. I did not mean to meet him, but one day when I flew on an ATR from Dunedin to Christchurch I happened to sit next to this fellow. He did not know who I was and I did not know who he was, but he was in pain. I asked him what was going on with him. He said he was in pain and that he had a bad back. I asked him where he was going, and he said he was going to Christchurch; he was going to Burwood Hospital to have his back checked. I asked him how he damaged his back, and he said the damage was sustained at the Finegand meatworks in Balclutha. I told him who I was, and I said that I did not need any more work but he clearly was in some trouble, and if he ever felt the need to come and see me he would be welcome. I gave him my card, he turned up a few weeks later, and he has been coming back for the last 10 to 12 years. That man has long since been thrown off accident compensation. He went mad with pain, and I mean that literally. He comes back now for almost a pastoral sort of a reason. He comes in and I give him a telling off. I tell him he needs to look for work, to see the bright side, to maintain better contact with his kids, and on it goes. It seems that that is my job with this particular gentleman. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe point of the story is that he is a victim of the last National Government changes to accident compensation, in the 1990s. He is a classic case of a person who was denied treatment because it would be too costly. He was thrown off. For God\u2019s sake, he was told that the damage was degenerative! I saw photographs of where it had happened. One thing led to another, his life quietly went backwards and backwards, he ended up becoming belligerent and violent, and he got himself into terrible trouble. He has that under control now, but he does not have his life back. He has some access to his kids, but his marriage is gone. He will remain a pauper. He cannot go to work now. He is too dysfunctional, and that is because, under the accident compensation legislation at the time, he did not get treatment for a back injury incurred in a meatworks in Balclutha. The whole thing was stacked against him. He got initial treatment at Burwood Hospital. He got initial physiotherapy. He got quite a lot of treatment in the first few months, but he had a badly damaged back, and the treatment was stopped because it was decided that he could go and do something else, and that part of the damage was not related to the injury. It was the same old same old, and that guy\u2019s life has been badly changed for ever. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EI say to members opposite that it is OK to undertake reviews because they might throw up cases like that, yet I am finding a Government that will not even engage in a debate. Mr Chair, I do not know how you can do your job or how you can decide how long a debate should go on, when only one side takes part, because then it is not a debate. That is why I have spent my contribution asking members opposite to get up and talk about why they do or do not support Part 3, which has been put forward by my colleague the Hon David Parker. This debating chamber is the shop window of democracy, and only one side has anything to say. That does not seem right to me. I say to colleagues opposite who are in the Chamber to feel free to take a call. I say to the Minister in the chair to feel free to take a call. If she ever gets to her feet, she knows that, as the Minister in the chair, she takes priority. But, no, members opposite are sitting with their heads down, apparently studying the daily newspaper. That is their contribution.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f437b0415a5940e38548ff7e451a8303\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: No, I\u2019d be generous and say its their shoes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce8d52f1f32543f29881f7214ad98f76\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it might be their shoes, but in any case they are not looking us in the eye. An idea has been put up. It has merit. It might not be very good, but surely it has some merit\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c7960585a7c46e6a72ea3813e37f03b\u0022\u003EChris Tremain\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CIt might not be very good\u201D. He\u2019s admitted it himself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248d49c9d991f46e6bd5d1bd0d1d32811\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: People on this side think it is pretty good, but the point is that if National members think it is not any good, let them get up and say why they do not think it is any good. Let them say something, anything, in this debating chamber of New Zealand. There is no other place. This is where laws are passed. This is where debates take place. This is where ideas are teased out or contested. This is where the battle of wills takes place. But only one side has anything to say. One side does not make a debate; it makes for an echo chamber, and I think that says heaps about the National Government\u2019s approach to its own legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022 data-id=\u0022fbe7d7890fbf494083c6df78ea3c1f71\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fbe7d7890fbf494083c6df78ea3c1f71\u0022\u003EJACINDA ARDERN (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to take a call on the amendment to insert new Part 3 in the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. I would like to add my voice to the challenge that was issued by the Hon Pete Hodgson to Government members to share with us their views on what I think is a very sensible amendment. I want to broaden the debate a little, by giving additional reasons why a review of the impact of this legislation and of the policy changes we have seen in accident compensation is so necessary. We have already had a discussion around, in particular, the Government\u2019s proposals regarding gradual process disease. I want to touch on that again, because recently in the Justice and Electoral Committee we have been hearing evidence on, and debating with policy officials about, the impact of changes to the Limitation Act. I think this comes right to the heart of this debate. We will be making changes in this legislation, but we cannot anticipate the impact and effect of them on other legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003ELet me explain what I mean by that. Based on this primary legislation, we have other dependent legislation. The Limitation Bill proposes that we set a limitation of 15 years on the time within which anyone can take a case. We have raised in this Chamber the issue of what happens if someone is suffering from a gradual process disorder or from the effects of continual exposure in the workplace to chemicals, repetitive actions in their job, or repetitive strain injuries. The impact of some of those conditions is not known for quite some time, yet we are legislating in this House to set limitations on when claims pertaining to those injuries can be made. When we have questioned Ministers and officials as to the impact of that in the workplace, the response has been that we have accident compensation. Well, I ask whether we do, and whether we will, have it. I do not think we will know the answer to that question immediately; it will take us time to know that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EOur first instinct is to say we should firm up the provisions and not to make significant changes to accident compensation that will impact on those people. Our second back-up option, if the changes are going to happen, is to say we should put in place the ability to review those decisions. That is perfectly sensible, because at the moment we do not know what their effects will be. It is not just their impact on accident compensation, but also the impacts in terms of other legislation. We have had assurances that may be false. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI always come to this issue with a particular case in mind. In the area where I do constituency work from time to time, where cases have come to us as list MPs, individuals have been the subject of diseases as a consequence of exposure to chemicals in a hospital environment dating back to the 1960s. In that particular case, the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) acknowledged those conditions; it was almost forced to because of a court case in which a hospital was ordered to pay compensation to ACC for the continuing care of these individuals. ACC has continued to support those individuals until recently. Whether there have been legislative changes, policy changes, or directives from Ministers and head offices, we are seeing a difference in terms of what happens in our areas. One such difference I have seen is that an individual, after receiving years of support from ACC, was suddenly told that the person does not have a workplace injury caused by continual exposure to chemicals but has a degenerative disease. Is it up to ACC caseworkers to tell an individual that he or she now has something like Alzheimer\u2019s disease? Is that their job? I seriously question whether that is their role, yet that is what we are seeing come through our doors. The psychological impact of that on individuals cannot be measured, yet that is what we confront on a daily basis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EIf that is not the intention of some of the changes we are seeing, whether they be policy or legislative changes, then let us have a review. What is the harm in doing that? I pose that challenge to the members on the opposite side of the Chamber. Another reason for a review is, I think, that, realistically, the impact of these changes is not on the elderly demographic. The biggest impact of these changes will be on the demographic that probably is not well represented by claimants at present. The impact will be on my generation, and on the generations that will follow it, not on the generation of those in this Chamber who have had continuous, no-fault accident compensation coverage for a number of years. Those young people are unlikely to know about the true impact of the accident compensation scheme until these changes have been in force for at least a year. So why do we not give them the chance to see that impact, as well? I pose that challenge to the Ministers opposite. I would have thought that having a review would appeal to the Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u002286a78308a2b74b05a8f7e7e74efdd8b3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002286a78308a2b74b05a8f7e7e74efdd8b3\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E It is a great pleasure to rise and speak in favour of the amendment proposed by the Hon David Parker to insert new Part 3 in the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. I think, as other colleagues have said, that it is a very important proposal to undertake annual reviews of the impact of the various changes that are being forced through this House under urgency. The changes, which we have been arguing about now for probably close to 8 hours, include many that are arbitrary, changes that are patently unfair, and changes that are discriminatory. It seems to me that very much part of any review of the changes should be making sure that we identify circumstances where unfairness has occurred, where blatant examples of discrimination have been found, and where cost shifting has taken place under the changes proposed by National. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI find it deeply disturbing that in the course of this debate there have been so few speakers from the Government side of the Chamber. It is particularly annoying that we have a Minister in the chair who, amongst her other responsibilities, is the Minister of Women\u2019s Affairs. I have raised a number of concerns about this legislation being discriminatory. I have raised the fact that the Human Rights Commission has raised some very specific concerns about the discriminatory impact of the proposed changes. I have raised the fact that the National Council of Women has raised concerns about the disproportionate effect of these changes\u2014a whole number of them\u2014on women. Has the Minister of Women\u2019s Affairs, who is also the Associate Minister for ACC, bothered to get up and justify these changes, or explain to us why, in fact, these changes are not discriminatory and will not disadvantage women? No, she has not. I think that is absolutely appalling. The women of New Zealand should note this, and, certainly, we will make sure that they know about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EBut likewise, there is a Minister of Labour, who I now see is back in the Chamber. This is the Minister of Labour to whom I specifically posed a number of questions earlier this morning in relation to holiday pay, and the provisions of this legislation that effectively ensure that some people will fund, at least partially, their own earnings-related compensation. One would think that the Minister of Labour might have a view on this matter\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022130da2914a4f43ac800296fb950e9f76\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: A clue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245285c1b561748df89c88724cffe5fe0\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014yes, a clue or a view, really, on this matter, because, frankly, this is one of the examples of a patently unfair provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003ELet us take the case of two workers who both get injured. One happens to have, fortunately, taken a paid holiday and enjoyed a holiday that he or she had accumulated leave for. Another has not had the chance to take a holiday, or is about to\u2014nobody can predict when an accident occurs. Those two workers will have very different outcomes, and one of them will have to partially fund his or her own earnings-related compensation. Now that is just unfair. Where is the Minister of Labour to answer that question? She also has not bothered to get to her feet to comment on that, and I just think that is appalling. It is appalling behaviour by Cabinet Ministers when they will not get up to defend the legislation that they are pushing through this House under urgency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThere are many, many examples throughout this bill of matters that are arbitrary, unfair, and discriminatory. Let me give members another one: the 6 percent hearing loss threshold before people have coverage for work-related hearing loss. This is an arbitrary provision. There is no medical, scientific, or other good reason for the figure of 6 percent. It could be 26 percent, or it could be 2 percent; it is an arbitrary figure. But it disentitles people, and that is a serious matter. Potentially it returns to workers the right to sue, which I do not think New Zealanders actually want to have. It will disproportionately affect older workers; probably men who work in primary industries or manufacturing will be particularly disadvantaged by this provision. Among them will be many M\u0101ori workers, many Pacific workers, and workers who have worked in places like meat plants and shearing gangs. Are we hearing any response to the concerns that we are raising? We are not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe reality is that this Government will force this legislation through the House, so let us at least review its operation. Let us find out what has happened to these people, because this legislation is about people. The failure to respond to the concerns that we are raising, that submitters have raised, and that advisers to the Government have raised is just appalling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u0022012916c0f6994baeb6c347d6724f129c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022012916c0f6994baeb6c347d6724f129c\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am really pleased to take a call on the amendment to insert new Part 3 in the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. If a Government member stands up in this Chamber and takes a closure motion again without following the principle of responding to the argument raised in the debate, I say he or she can expect big-time criticism from this side of the Chamber. We have seen two Ministers\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f52529fd60642ba8d3de33919a051e5\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I am very reluctant to do this during a call by one of my own colleagues, but it appears that the Government whips have gone on strike and are refusing to take points of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c02fabfaa8f94708bde8e6c6340affe1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: That is not a point of order. The whips have the discretion to determine when they want to take calls, and it is up to them. There will be no inference or guidance from either you or me as to when a Government whip wishes to take a closure motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022963d13c29e374bda92f49948eeee8d85\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I had not actually got to the point of order. I was only indicating that I was being of assistance to the Government in this particular point of order. I thought that this was probably an opportune time to point out to my colleagues that when the Chairman has made a ruling on a closure motion, even if it is a ruling that is supportive and the member is being supportive of the Chairman in his role, it is not appropriate for a member to comment on that. I would say my colleague should take some care.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225fc842fdd4f54341aead441edbb7a365\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I do not need any further help on this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240490011927d469db5406c9e74b8ece2\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. This is a new point of order, which is quite separate from the interesting observation and intervention of my colleague Mr Mallard. It relates to the Government whip. From time to time throughout the course of the debate, it is necessary for whips on both sides of the Chamber to approach the presiding officer in the middle of the Chamber. I have noticed that the senior Government whip is making many, many trips to consult with the Minister in the chair, to talk to you, and to ask questions of you and the Minister. That has to happen, but it is just the frequency with which it appears to be happening that is causing some dismay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7a0fe36de184199baeafb2bd40e0c9a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: You are bringing the integrity of the Chair into question when you\u2014[Interruption] Well, I am the sole judge, and if the senior Government whip wishes to come and talk to me, then I will accept that. If you wish to come and talk to me, I will accept that. But I can assure you that there is no interference or anything untoward occurring when the senior Government whip comes to talk to the Minister in the chair or to me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288107bade8034aac8d7e572a4bb1e744\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I seek an assurance, and I do this in a way that does not reflect on you in any way, because there is no suggestion\u2014or I hope there is no suggestion\u2014that the senior whip has been asking you for procedural advice, because that would, of course, be\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255f14004365647538f07329a783e62b4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: No. I have made my position very clear. I am the sole judge, and that is how it stands. Lynne Pillay has the call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb2024eb02b84dc880bca40b1bd1fe07\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Chair, I think my colleague Trevor Mallard\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de8f39c1ffbf4aeab99e5c79af80272a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: No, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d61542d71ed94a7b88532397a90b0bae\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: I want to clarify something, Mr Chair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022263a89ab7d234e82a2dee2c4e94bbfdb\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I am giving you the call and I ask you to continue. You have 4\u00BD minutes left.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6a3c00589e44af3828006aa7e3bc8aa\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair. I urge members of the Opposition to take a call on this bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8170f2e7ba8422b9491cab63884a51b\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re in the Opposition. Have you forgotten?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224cce780df144c929488a032c5b602fc\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014members of the Government, I am sorry. I am just jumping ahead 2 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EIn speaking to Part 3, I say it is very important that with our amendment that asks for a review, we are not asking for just one review to be held after 1 year. We are asking for a review to be held every year thereafter. As the ACT member very clearly pointed out to me, we are not in Government currently. But when you are in Opposition\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc8365295e8d42a19810e07033c2f007\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224dcaef8e8e354dec95070bc5c662704b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I know what the member is going to say, because I had to bring this point of order yesterday. The member cannot bring the Chair into the debate. This is a one-clause debate. It is not a wide-ranging debate; this is on clause 60. It is a very, very narrow clause, and the member cannot bring the Chair into it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022068935d990984cefb5252f9f52ffe533\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Let me address just the review. In terms of the review, we are requesting a commitment to conduct a review within a year and every year thereafter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EMy colleague Sue Moroney talked about what could be the unintended consequences of this legislation. I put it to this Committee that it is not even the unintended consequences that we are worried about; it is the intended consequences. The intended consequences will cause real havoc. We have seen two Ministers sitting in the chair whose portfolios are directly affected by this legislation. As my colleague Sue Moroney said, it will be very much to the detriment of women, of women workers, and also, as I said before to the Minister of Labour, it is an attack on the right of workers to take a holiday\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002297c021c6ef8f4cddaf10429d19de95b3\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: What did she say?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7a642c4f68142ce89bb5898e71deafc\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E:\u2014What did the Minister say? That is my point. That is the point I was trying to make. It was not about the closure motions but about the fact that members on the other side of the Chamber are not engaging in this debate. My view, and the view of the Opposition, is that if you feel very strongly\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a9cf2ca260a427d9654a8ce8bf02684\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228543a423061e4ffeafaae212ccf6823c\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: If the Government feels very strongly that this is the right thing to do, then the Government should take a call. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWe are the first to accept that yesterday Nick Smith really showed the Government\u2019s true agenda. I suspect that the other Government members have said they have actually let too much out of the bag about how callous their attitude is towards workers and injured people in New Zealand, so they should all be quiet. But this amendment is something that the Government can respond to. It is about accountability. It is about accountability for changes that the Government is pushing through under urgency that will cause much heartache, anxiety, and stress in our communities right throughout New Zealand. I would urge Government members not only to consider very carefully this amendment\u2014I think it is a very good amendment on the part of both David Parker and Ruth Dyson, who has expanded on the amendment\u2014but also to consider taking a call to explain their view of it, or to give us a clue. They should give us a clue as to the Government\u2019s attitude towards the amendment. If Government members do support the amendment they should take a call. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EMy big concern is, as has been outlined, about hearing aids. When we see that people with 6 percent hearing loss will not get support from the accident compensation scheme, we know that will be very much to their detriment. I want to draw attention to the National Foundation for the Deaf, which has a very good magazine. What did it say? What is its cover story? \u201CACC delivers a cruel blow to older people.\u201D It talks about the absolute unfairness of that change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022 data-id=\u002260878e79a8cf4c35b78a3a3cd52ad32a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002260878e79a8cf4c35b78a3a3cd52ad32a\u0022\u003EKEVIN HAGUE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E It is great to be able to take a second call on this. I echo the calls that come from the Labour members to the Government, challenging Government members, and perhaps the Associate Minister sitting in the chair, Pansy Wong, to respond and to actually set out a position on the proposed amendment, because on the face of it we have here a dispute about some of the effects of provisions of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Bill. Labour members and the Green Party say that some of the provisions in the bill will shift costs from the scheme and from the State on to injured people and their families. We are not entirely clear whether the Government accepts that that is the case. I think Government members probably do accept that. I am not sure whether they would be prepared to admit it in the Chamber. If there is a dispute about that, then surely the sensible way of resolving that dispute is through some kind of review mechanism, as David Parker has proposed in his amendment. It would make sense for the Government to take a call to set out its position about that sensible proposal. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EI want to come to this business of \u201Cmust\u201D or \u201Cmay\u201D, because to me that is one of the kinds of provisions that are in the bill that in fact give rise to some of the concerns about cost shifting, that we are moving from a situation where the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) must take into account certain considerations, to a situation where it may. If it may, as has been pointed out in the debate on earlier parts, then also it may not. That means that a much greater degree of discretion will be required from ACC officers. What we know about the exercise of discretion is that it may be subject to pressure from Ministers. I think what we have seen in the ACC portfolio in recent months is exactly that kind of problem. We have seen the kind of problem where provisions in relation to mental injury in the case of sexual abuse, for example, have given rise to a different interpretation of the provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EWhy this is important is that we will see more and more of that kind of problem in the future over the provisions of this bill, because ACC will be required not simply to be implementing the law as it exists but to exercise discretion. So if there is cost pressure, for example, on the corporation, that may lead it to start making decisions that significantly change where costs fall. If that were the case, then it would represent a significant cost shifting that is not set out in the bill, but has resulted from it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EIt may well be that my fears about this could be answered by the Minister or perhaps the Associate Minister. I would very much like the opportunity to ask the Minister in question time today about the Government\u2019s intentions on those issues. Sadly, that will not be possible; there will not be a question time before the Government intends to push through this bill, so I am not able to address that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EWhat I want to come down to is the issue of discretion, and the discretion that is opened up by the bill, and therefore the increasing possibility of cost shifting that cannot be quantified at this point. In recent months we have seen not only those changes to sensitive claims processing, where ACC has changed its interpretation of what the law says about mental injury and about the way that that test is applied. That has resulted in a significant shifting of cost from the State on to the victims of sexual abuse, effectively re-victimising them. The bill opens up the possibility\u2014in fact the probability, I would say\u2014of very much more of that occurring. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EWe have seen an increased incidence in recent months of claims being turned down. We have seen an increased incidence of compensation payments being abruptly terminated. I remember the bad old days of ACC when this used to happen routinely. In the 1980s and early 1990s I took a particular role in advocacy around ACC standing up for some of the people who had been victims of accidents or who had sustained injuries in all sorts of ways. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002295a409d744f546bd9170c9da41198808\u0022\u003EVisitors\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002219191ec42386435fad2c2e278dcca65f\u0022\u003EUnited Kingdom\u2014Rt Hon Lord Hunt of Wirral, House of Lords\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u0022c82f045942ee45ba9599e78f16c6194f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c82f045942ee45ba9599e78f16c6194f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I have much pleasure in informing members that the Rt Hon Lord Hunt of Wirral MBE, of the House of Lords of the United Kingdom, is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222ae0abfe519f417c8bfdab524d7003b9\u0022\u003EInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00224310acd13d2a43e3a26e74e267fc0296\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000392\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002255dae21fd61c43c9a5e102346993182a\u0022\u003ENew Part 3  Requirement to undertake annual reviews of impact of various changes (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u002262c9851f49ac4f508611cf85ebc0aeeb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002262c9851f49ac4f508611cf85ebc0aeeb\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. It relates to Standing Order 320, which requires that amendments to bills that can affect or have an impact upon the Government\u2019s fiscal aggregates need to be lodged with the Clerk at least 24 hours before they are considered by the Committee. New Part 3 and, I believe, subsequent parts do not meet that test, and most certainly do have an impact on the Government\u2019s fiscal aggregates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220df049b548e44de19cdf7fd272bd3042\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: How so?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022147b06755cd3402f896c9b02e3c44d0a\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: It is the fiscal aggregates of the Government that we are talking about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa5f92b0fbee445998aebebbe1b972d2\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Rubbish!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223fb339d600f94b5eaedbe93d1782b9d8\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: I am reading from the Standing Orders of the House of Representatives. Standing Order 320(1) states that an amendment that may have an impact on the Government\u2019s fiscal aggregates\u2014[Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e57099ca64c849ffa13e891ec6673b9b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Points of order will be heard in silence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0638aee4edd42238de4270cede83f7e\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: That will be novel for those people. An amendment that may have an impact on the Government\u2019s fiscal aggregates etc. must be lodged with the Clerk at least 24 hours before the House meets on the day on which the amendment is to be proposed. This part does not meet that test.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002209dc4a28020e4f69bb7f3e1203f05d5d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002209dc4a28020e4f69bb7f3e1203f05d5d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I presume this matter can be dealt with relatively quickly. \u201CFiscal aggregates\u201D is a term that has been used on a number of occasions for a long period of time, and any suggestion that a change as minor as this one would have an effect on the fiscal aggregates of the Government goes to the point of being absolutely ridiculous. The effect would be within the margin of error\u20141 percent of the size of the fiscal aggregates of the Government. There is, clearly, an ability to veto on the part of the Government, if in fact that is the case. That, again, is something where no Minister of Finance would ever pretend\u2014is the Hon Gerry Brownlee an Associate Minister of Finance?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ea38b2321054d8ead66ec8bceb262a9\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: No, economic development.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022816f600b43424167a064139817b2ea2e\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: He is the Minister for Economic Development. No Minister of Finance would ever pretend that this amendment would have an effect on the fiscal aggregates, because it is such a small number. For example, if the member had moved an amendment to bring forward the close-off date from 2019 to 2015, there might be an argument that that would affect the fiscal aggregates of the Government. It might or it might not; even a number of that size might not. But this amendment is so minor that when the Government\u2019s spending is brought together\u2014aggregated\u2014no one could pretend that it would have an effect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022 data-id=\u002219c2d32386df41879970acdbb34f57ae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002219c2d32386df41879970acdbb34f57ae\u0022\u003EKEVIN HAGUE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The point of order raised by the Leader of the House ought to have to been raised at the beginning of the debate on this part, when the amendment was first moved. Instead, no point of order was taken, the Chair accepted the amendment, and debate commenced. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u00220a5a32d64f81426295a3819efc1fb4bb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a5a32d64f81426295a3819efc1fb4bb\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank members for their contributions. I think there are four points that I can see arising out of this point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EThe first point is enshrined in Standing Order 320, and in Speakers\u2019 rulings 119/1-4, where there is quite a raft of information about it. On the strength of that, the point of order is upheld.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EI think there are three other points that I need to comment on, as well, and I will deal first with the point of the Green Party member Mr Hague. At no point do the Standing Orders define a lapse time for a point of order if it is relevant. That the member did not raise his point at the time the amendment was moved is not a reason for ruling out the point of order. Had we voted on this part and moved on, we could not return to it. In that regard, it is perfectly relevant to raise the point of order at this time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EThe third point that springs to mind\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f203755c0fc2494583e339eb8452b4ef\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Springs to mind.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022509ae7b0a2e84c84b3084f449c6cab0a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014sorry, that comes to mind\u2014in relation to this matter is when the day actually starts. Because we are in urgency, and the sitting day stays the same, it would be my ruling that the day started at 2 p.m. yesterday. I have inquired of the Clerks, and I find that these amendments therefore would have had to be lodged at 2 p.m. on Monday. Even given another interpretation that it was a chronological 24 hours, the amendments do not fit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EThe fourth point is whether the amendment is a trivial matter in terms of its effect on the financial aggregates. The Standing Orders do not required the Chair to rule on that; that is the prerogative of the Government. It is not the Chair\u2019s job to rule whether the effect is trivial; it is simply to rule whether the amendment has a fiscal implication. In that regard I am bound to uphold the point of order. That would mean that new Parts 3, 4, and 5 are ruled out of order in relation to the ruling I have just given.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u002285108ca840f14223a406915385a3694e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002285108ca840f14223a406915385a3694e\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The words you used then were that it was not for the Chair to determine whether the impact on the fiscal aggregates is large. Speaker\u2019s ruling 119/1 states: \u201CDuring the committee of the whole House, the Government will be able to make a submission to the chairperson that an amendment or a change proposed to be moved, appears to have more than a minor impact on the fiscal aggregates \u2026\u201D. It goes on to say that if there is doubt whether the effect is more than minor, then the amendment should be ruled out. I suggest to you, Mr Chairperson, that there is no doubt that the impact of this amendment is minor. This is the most minor sort of review, and I cannot see how it could have a more than minor impact on the fiscal aggregates. In order for you to rule it out, Mr Chairperson, you have to be satisfied that there is at least doubt that the impact is minor.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00225ff338b9f34049f18ff9c4d521ac0a71\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ff338b9f34049f18ff9c4d521ac0a71\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E The other point that I would like to draw your attention to, Mr Chairperson, is Speaker\u2019s ruling 119/4, where it is made clear that it is quite proper for the Minister to raise the issue on official advice. I want to ensure that you have sought confirmation from the Minister that there is official advice. If there is official advice, we know that it is always obtained in writing from Treasury. That is the way that that advice occurs. The Opposition wants to ensure that there is that official advice. If that is the case, we are happy to go with it. It was always tabled in the past.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022003e8eec8cd84f0fb7a9cd2dde86193b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Gerry Brownlee should respond to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022e0d2568c318f4a2d8340a3e53e08db7d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e0d2568c318f4a2d8340a3e53e08db7d\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I am advised by Treasury that the cost of this provision would be somewhere between $600,000 and $1 million. Whatever way members like to look at it, that is an impact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d178800d4ef04022bf95b04a05b96a4c\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u00222510a2c16d1f4735aa8cbfa492178f29\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222510a2c16d1f4735aa8cbfa492178f29\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I will rule on this point first. Can I say that the Chair does not have at his disposal the kind of information that the Leader of the House has just given. It is part of the process of this institution that the Chair accepts Ministers\u2019 advice on that matter, and the Leader of the House has confirmed that he sought advice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f26bd5cc6217423fad603a97094ab153\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Could we ask the Minister to confirm that that advice is written advice?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224bda27a8010b4211be6e763e768232bf\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: As far as I am aware, it does not have to be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00225f8bb4b30774423dafdf614bca5c9f06\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225f8bb4b30774423dafdf614bca5c9f06\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. That is something that is very clear and very important. Ministers, when they have advice that is required by the Standing Orders, have always got that advice in writing. It is part of having a record. It is a protection for the Minister, and it is a protection for this House. I am not doubting that there is such Treasury advice\u2014because the Minister has assured us that there is\u2014but I want to know that it is available, and that it is in writing, because it is something that will have to be tested going forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u00222cc5e35d792e4f9eb5c3fba84c94bc16\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222cc5e35d792e4f9eb5c3fba84c94bc16\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I think, in response to that, that there are layers to the reasons why an amendment can be ruled out. This is not a financial veto, which probably has a higher level of standards around it. But the 24-hour rule is a requirement. I remind members again that all members in this Parliament are honourable members, and if the Leader of the House gives me his word that he received advice, it is not, in my opinion, my responsibility to then require him to present to me written evidence of his having had that advice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022dddbbfdbda2942ff843f35b815ebd577\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dddbbfdbda2942ff843f35b815ebd577\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I have several points to raise with you. I will first take the point you have just raised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWith regard to Speaker\u2019s ruling 119/4, the ruling contains the phrase \u201Cofficial advice,\u201D and the inclusion of the word \u201Cofficial\u201D must mean something. As Mr Mallard has said to you, we have now had the Leader of the House say verbally that the cost of the amendment would be between $600,000 and $1 million. What happens if, down the track, the official information is found not to have existed, and the Leader of the House has said in the Committee that it does exist and has said what the advice is? When Mr Mallard asked about it, Mr Brownlee waved a piece of paper that is acting as his bookmark in his copy of the Standing Orders of the House of Representatives. It is a handwritten note on paper that has been ripped out of a notebook\u2014it is perforated along the side. That note cannot possibly constitute official advice to the Government of New Zealand about this matter. So I raise that point with you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI also raise a second point, Mr Chairperson, about the fact that when we read Speaker\u2019s ruling 119/4\u2014and Mr Mallard has quoted the first part\u2014we see that it continues: \u201CIt is quite proper for the Minister to raise the issue on official advice,\u201D, and finishes off: \u201Calthough it is finally for the chairperson to rule.\u201D That is a very important point for you, Mr Chairperson, because I noticed that when the point of order was taken at 2 o\u2019clock you had a lot of information at your fingertips. You were able to give four points to us when you were ruling on it. But the ability of the Opposition to propose amendments to legislation, whether they are in support of, or in disagreement with, the law, is quite an important point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThe reason I raise that is that previously it was totally out of order for an Opposition to put forward any amendments that had any fiscal impact whatsoever. The changes to the Standing Orders at the end of 1995, which came into effect in 1996, altered that, so that an amendment could come from the Opposition that might have some costing associated with it. But rather than use the term \u201Cfinancial impact\u201D\u2014that is, $1 or more\u2014the term \u201Cfiscal aggregates\u201D was used, so that it was clear that amendments that involved costs that were small as a percentage of the Government\u2019s total spend would not simply be ruled out or dismissed. It is very hard to accept that in a Government Budget of about $60,000 million, a review costing half a million dollars is somehow some extraordinary change to the Government\u2019s fiscal aggregates. A stay at a hotel in Tonga or a trip on the Interislander does not have a big impact on the Government\u2019s fiscal aggregates, either. Those are the sorts of figures we are talking about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThis is a device being used by the Government to try to stop the Opposition from being able to propose amendments to the legislation\u2014amendments that the Government can vote down. It will have that option shortly; we have spent about an hour discussing Part 3, and Government members will have the option of voting against it to show that they are not in support of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EMr Chairperson, the Speakers\u2019 rulings make the point that it is finally for you to rule on this matter. If you as Chair accept that a Minister who feels frustrated at the length of time of a debate and says \u201COh, look, that amendment is just too expensive.\u201D is not required to supply you with any written advice that is then available for the Committee to look at, and if the Minister does not give any detail about what the advice is, then the Opposition could have all of its amendments ruled out for all time. There is a cost even in the simple fact that when an amendment is accepted by the Committee, it forces a printer to go into action somewhere within the Government. That is a financial cost. If the Government goes down the path of not only stopping us from having question time but also stopping the Opposition from proposing amendments because, by their very nature, there will be a cost of some amount\u2014a fiscal impact\u2014that is different from an effect on the fiscal aggregates, which is the way in which our Speakers\u2019 rulings and Standing Orders have been written.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI think that this is a really critical point, Mr Chairperson, and the Opposition respectfully seeks your assistance with it. Otherwise, there is no point in doing any of these debates, because as soon as the Leader of the House loses his temper about these matters, the ball will be thrown and we will all have to go home. That seems preposterous to me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002211fd5d50e8b848e89d609ddcf53a1dc4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211fd5d50e8b848e89d609ddcf53a1dc4\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I refer you, Mr Chairperson, to Speaker\u2019s ruling 136/4, and go back to the question of the perforated piece of paper from a notebook, which the Leader of the House is relying on. I quote: \u201CAn official document is not just a piece of paper with notes for the Minister\u2019s guidance, but is a more formal piece of writing conveying a message or memorandum, or recording some matter between officials of the Government or between the Government and other persons.\u201D That is the sort of document that, in my opinion, advice consists of. That is the way that Ministers get advice. It is official. There is a proper record of it. I do not know in whose hand the note on the perforated piece of notepaper is, but it is my submission to you, Mr Chairperson, that, in that form, it cannot be an official document, and therefore it cannot be the source of the advice that the Leader of the House has received. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EJust as a matter of guidance on fiscal aggregates, my memory is that, as far as Dr Cullen was concerned, an amendment had to have an effect of more than $10 million before he would\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292cd80c770f148e08974a10c41eb7c2b\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4083ffe1afd4e44b8c84e75594c1814\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Can the member just sum up?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd61da66fb8f4b6ab64f770b15b0c106\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: The next point I am making, as to an effect on the fiscal aggregates, is that Dr Cullen\u2019s view was that a figure of $10 million was the point at which he would start being interested as to whether there was an effect on the fiscal aggregates. Dr Cullen used to make clear that the Government had a majority in the House, and if we did not like an amendment, we voted against it rather than attempting to have it ruled out through this method or through a financial veto. What he saw as an effect on the fiscal aggregates sufficient to trigger this mechanism or to trigger the financial veto\u2014generally, an effect would have to be bigger in order to trigger the financial veto\u2014was something much more significant than the cost of this amendment, which at most would be $1 million, with the best estimate being about $200,000.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b303055c0ce46498f1d433cb7baca39\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Let me deal with what I think are three points that have come out. I think that this series of points of order on the process around this stuff is useful. I regard it as quite valuable. I will deal firstly with the last point that the Hon Trevor Mallard raised, in terms of amount. There is no guidance for me anywhere that I can find, in the Standing Orders, Speakers\u2019 rulings, McGee, or anywhere, that actually defines an amount. That is the prerogative of the Government. If it were $10 million or any figure, it would be enshrined somewhere. That is my difficulty. Moving away from saying \u201CThis doesn\u2019t fit.\u201D, or \u201CThat doesn\u2019t fit.\u201D, I tell the Committee that there is no documented evidence for me to go to in order to determine what amount is trivial.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003ELet us now go to whether it was appropriate or proper for the Leader of the House to have raised this matter, and again we go to Speaker\u2019s ruling 119/4, which states clearly in the second-to-last sentence: \u201CIt is quite proper for the Minister to raise the issue on official advice,\u201D. The member raised the matter of whether the paper was an official document, but the ruling does not say \u201Cofficial document\u201D; it states \u201Cofficial advice\u201D. Again, in the time that I have had at my disposal to look at this matter, nowhere have I found a specification about what is official advice. As I said earlier, I have to accept that the Leader of the House has received advice, and I so rule on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EThen we come to the matter of the responsibility of the Chairperson, which is my responsibility. I go to the latest edition of McGee, at page 381, and the fourth paragraph states in regard to this matter: \u201CThe chairperson does not determine such a matter on a balance of probabilities; a possibility is sufficient.\u201D So I am guided by McGee on this matter, in terms of ruling in favour of the point of order raised by Gerry Brownlee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EWe move now to the vote on the schedules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00228bce8125d19b4d0994dd1dc32aba9649\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228bce8125d19b4d0994dd1dc32aba9649\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I am sorry but a lot of discussion was taking place while you were giving your ruling. Are you declining to rule on Speaker\u2019s ruling 119/4, which sets out that it is quite proper for a Minister to give official advice? You are accepting the torn off bit of paper that is perforated down the side\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fff9f9e21c44bf6833027f467f8cc54\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I am.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6ba4bbed2d64743b62d9d96d78d19e5\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and handwritten as official Government advice? You are ruling against Speaker\u2019s ruling 136/3?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022337cedb8a17c4ae3927f304eb7391ba1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I am accepting that the Leader of the House has had official advice. That is what I am accepting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d8f7c8b95f141d0b9463f9dd243aac8\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: On what basis?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a67e0cf5731549358283f73872890452\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: His word.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221fbc82af49c34653b94f089a4c95f1e8\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: His word. So what recourse does the Opposition have if it turns out that that advice does not exist?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0653e2fea384abbaa5b75cde81d5efb\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I remind the member that all members are honourable members, and if at a subsequent time any member is found to have misled the House, there is a course of action, which is substantially Draconian, for dealing with the matter. Well, it rules justice in a way that members understand. There are matters of privilege; there is a whole range of things. Members have that course open to them if it is subsequently found that any member has misled the House, and this issue is no different.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u0022c2534fccbdca48cabbc7dd467a9f25b8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c2534fccbdca48cabbc7dd467a9f25b8\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cffa6cd896c4440cb9ee63a64c0b3e1c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I am about finished with this issue, unless there is new material.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7f5844e48da43c9806affda281f3b8f\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: You have ruled out of order the addition of Part 3 in my name.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252238a7a4d8347a99f6cdf028b031118\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Correct. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d47509497c84c38a1338ac19702261f\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have not heard any rulings about the other amendments. Are you now ruling them out of order also?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228eecb6b05d1a449cbfd0a26be574bff6\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. I did say when I responded in the first instance that I was ruling out the amendment in your name currently under debate, and also the amendments to add Part 4 and Part 5. I have already given that ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u00228930ea7e3fb947559331b9b4772b4a91\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228930ea7e3fb947559331b9b4772b4a91\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Are we to take it, then, that the advice you have received from Mr Brownlee is that each of those amendments, of itself, causes cost that would materially change the fiscal aggregates, or is the advice that, in the aggregate, the amendments would cost between $600,000 and $1 million, or whatever the figure was? By the way, I accept the Minister\u2019s word as to the amount.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022593b32d826ca4c28b272a556a37c6a78\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I think there are two points there. Let me clarify the member\u2019s first point, which was about advice that I as Chair have received: the Committee of the whole House has received that advice; it is not pertinent to me only. The second thing is that I have accepted that advice in relation to the three amendments before us to add new Parts 3, 4, and 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u00228b18b0e0f6034e3fb2af88aa544230ac\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228b18b0e0f6034e3fb2af88aa544230ac\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I am not trying to be difficult. My confusion about the amount that the Committee was told is material. Is it the cost of each of these reviews, or is it the cost of all of them? It is a relatively simple question that I thought we should be able to get an answer to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a57b07281e949c09600e1dc9d37f411\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: This is my interpretation of it. We have trolled through this area and established some principles around it. The Leader of the House has said to us that each of the amendments has an impact on the fiscal aggregates. We have also established that there is no threshold of triviality, so we simply accept it. The Leader of the House, of his own volition, gave some numbers. I am prepared to accept his word that each of the amendments has an implication for the fiscal aggregates. I have accepted it on that basis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002284aa117a95274298afd8aad2138b8704\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002284aa117a95274298afd8aad2138b8704\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I want to check that you have had an assurance from the Leader of the House that these amendments could not be done within the baselines that are currently available\u2014that they would require an extra appropriation as opposed to using current appropriations\u2014because if they can be done within the baselines, they will not affect the fiscal aggregates. In my view, in a vote the size of the one we are talking about there is not a bolter\u2019s show in hell of these amendments affecting the baselines of the Accident Compensation Corporation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d8ed133064b84927b31af520130052a8\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Let me affirm again to the Committee of the whole House that I am not privy to any information. When the member raised the point of order he asked whether I had been told information by the Leader of the House; he told the Committee. That is the first thing. The Leader of the House told the Committee that these amendments will have an impact on the fiscal aggregates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022c07f54f4239e4bf39fbb3a3efcb3ca8b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c07f54f4239e4bf39fbb3a3efcb3ca8b\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I do not want to show disrespect, Mr Chairperson, but you came to the Committee with the answers to a series of questions. I cannot accept that you did not have some sort of briefing on this matter before you came to the Committee. I have enormous personal respect for you, Mr Chairperson, I have known you for a long time and I respect your integrity, but I do not think you should attempt to tell the Committee that you had not been briefed and you were unaware of this matter. You clearly were aware of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d67d34bc5c0940a7a5c16b746a34cdb2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Let me respond to that. Every day before I come to the House I spend time with the Clerks. They are whom I spend time with. When I came into the Chamber Mr Brownlee was sitting next to me, and I said \u201CDo not talk to me.\u201D He may or may not wish to confirm that, but I think the member will accept my word. So I am dealing simply with some anticipation\u2014because this is developing into a filibuster\u2014as to what the probabilities would be\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243fb8b5f90d14f238226dc1371be4857\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: It is not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec067d616d4d4980affd04bcac26a007\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: It is taking somewhat of an interesting twist\u2014let me put it that way. I do not want to accuse anybody of anything, and I apologise for that. It is the right of the Opposition to explore every possible avenue, and it is my responsibility to make myself conversant with the pertinent Standing Orders and Speakers\u2019 rulings, and McGee. Also, we have spent some 25 minutes on this matter, and there has been an opportunity for the Clerks to advise me and give me some quotes, like the one I took from McGee. I did not prepare it before I came here. Members have to accept that I am dealing with this matter in the most straightforward manner that I can. We will now put the vote on the schedules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022795ca95b598d48a18705ee5d1dcc06e2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022795ca95b598d48a18705ee5d1dcc06e2\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. First, I echo what Mr Mallard said about the personal respect we have for you. Mr Mallard and I would like to invite you to join us for lunch tomorrow, when the House will still be in urgency, to make sure there is not a single chance of Mr Brownlee getting to you. He will be in quite a mood by then, I predict. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI want to take you to the point where you referred to your role as the Chair of the Committee. As a presiding officer you have a number of functions, but the protection of the rights of the minority is one of the most important ones, and it is one that you do very, very well indeed. You referred to your view of the proceedings of the Committee at the present time, and it is probably correct that things could have taken an alternative, parallel path to the one they are taking at the present time. But there are three amendments that propose three new parts. I would not describe them in the language you did\u2014although you did withdraw it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ead0a2fd12a42c989bed9a3577a2eeb\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I rescinded it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0869db882ce4c5da3b4571519385fbc\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: But it goes to the fact that just because the Government is unhappy with the process that has been followed by the Opposition is no reason for our amendments to be ruled out. If every single one of our amendments is going to be ruled out because of a claim that it will have an impact on the fiscal aggregates\u2014and you yourself have said that the triviality or otherwise of the cost is irrelevant\u2014it actually means that the Government could rule out every single amendment that the Opposition seeks to put to this legislation, which affects the lives of hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders. That is why I bring you back to Speaker\u2019s ruling 119/4, and to the very last few words\u2014the last seven or eight words\u2014\u201Calthough it is finally for the chairperson to rule\u201D. If the Government is allowed to get away with this behaviour\u2014and the great irony is that we had spent an hour on Part 3, and we would have had the vote by now, and we would have moved on; we have lost time on procedure, because of the Government\u2019s management style\u2014if every single amendment is ruled out because you are saying that triviality is not important, then the Opposition has lost its voice. That is why we are appealing to you, Mr Chairperson, as the defender of the minority in the Chamber, to make sure that that does not happen. I am not confident that the Leader of the House will not try to bulldoze the legislation through the House because he has the pip about something that is far beyond my intelligence to understand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u002252cd9e20969744ea842aaee2b5687065\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002252cd9e20969744ea842aaee2b5687065\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210e25d86432a4d4e84e23b079402d4a1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Is it a fresh point of order? I should rule on the current one. Are you speaking to it? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c5b355a859f44cea2cbddd16eba72f6\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: I think I should speak to the point of order. There has been a degree of emotive expression that is somewhat disappointing. I would like the member to consider that although it is the right of the Opposition to try to put forward views, equally it is the right of the Government to govern and to go about its business in the House, and our protections, both yours and mine, lie in this book, the Speakers\u2019 Rulings. I ask the member to look at Speaker\u2019s ruling 119/3, which is of no lesser import than 119/4. It has in fact been endorsed by former Chairperson Pettis and former Speaker Hunt. It states that Standing Order 320 \u201Cis not neutral as to whether an amendment is out of order. If a member fails to give 24 hours\u2019 notice and there is any doubt or possibility that it has a fiscal impact, the amendment is out of order.\u201D That is all we have raised. These Speakers\u2019 rulings are here for the House to be guided by, and I think we should get on with our business.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u002225f65b9938de40838748e21e95f2b87b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002225f65b9938de40838748e21e95f2b87b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I will now rule on the matter that the Hon Darren Hughes raised. I thank him for his expression of respect, and I will look at taking up the luncheon offer. But I want to correct him on something that\u2014[Interruption] Points of order are heard in silence. I want to clarify\u2014because the member picked me up wrongly\u2014that I said that it was not for the Chair to rule whether something is trivial. The member said that the Chair ruled whether something was a trivial matter. There is a pertinent difference. I have not ruled whether this matter is trivial; I have simply ruled, as per McGee, that the possibility exists. I have therefore chronologically followed through that process in determining that. So I have not ruled that it is trivial.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EThe fundamental point that the member made is that the Chair can rule out amendments. I pick up on Speaker\u2019s ruling 119/3, which Mr Brownlee raised. It is there for good reason, and it is not neutral. I think it is just a little wake-up call that where there is a possibility of a fiscal aggregate implication, anyone putting in an amendment simply has to obey the 24-hour rule. That does not rule out the possibility of debate, at all. I will now put the question on schedule 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022450f1e33c62f42f9aad448593bb64bb5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022450f1e33c62f42f9aad448593bb64bb5\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227af8fc47eb4d452981dd32c2dc1c6cc9\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I think we have just about addressed every\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225dc724fb2e294b368a40e8d36fac2552\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: It is a different point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b86f1248dbf24466bd6ace746509b432\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I will listen with interest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ff691494fbd498da372c5dcfe0e4050\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: We strongly contest the approach that is being taken\u2014it leaves us with very few rights in the way of posing amendments\u2014but if that is the way it is going to be ruled, then we have to do our best to advocate and articulate for the people we represent. But we rely on the protection of the Chair for these matters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EOne of the difficulties is that the House, as you mentioned before, is in urgency. Urgency was signalled to the Opposition very, very late in the piece\u2014far later than more recent practice under Mr Brownlee\u2019s tenure as Leader of the House. This particular amendment to create a new Part 3 was lodged 23\u00BD hours ago. We did our best to comply with the information available to us at the time we put these amendments forward. There is a point where it is impossible for the Opposition to comply with the 24-hour rule. If the Government operates in this fashion, it curtails the ability of the Opposition to comply with that rule. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EAs you can appreciate, these are serious amendments. They create three new parts\u2014three important parts to do with injury prevention. I do not think anyone could argue that they are not serious amendments. The Government might not like them, but they are not ridiculous. They are not frivolous amendments; they are proper ones. We have to write them, to make sure they comply with the Standing Orders, and to have them tabled, and if the ability is not there to do so, because the Government has moved urgency without that happening\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237c2fb536d794e92a6d6f1a917eb3a4d\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: They had brought this matter up the Order Paper compared with where it had been.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b3c71ef501b4eefa536393461720ea0\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. This bill was moved higher up the Order Paper than it had been, as my colleague rightly says. It was set down at about No. 4 or No. 5. We arrived in Wellington on Tuesday, we were advised that the House was going into urgency, and the bill became No. 1 on the Order Paper. It became impossible for us to comply with the 24-hour rule. The Leader of the House is losing a lot of time that he need not lose if he were operating in a slightly different way. It does not have to be this way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u002221f33deaefc141b6b831f4c7df716347\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002221f33deaefc141b6b831f4c7df716347\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I will respond to that point and say that the second reading of the bill was on the Order Paper last Thursday, so members could have assumed that it was going to be dealt with this week, and they could have applied themselves to the sort of exercise we are in now. But given that that is not the case, the final Order Paper would have been printed by 10.30 on Tuesday morning, at the time when caucuses are having their powwows about process\u2014or whatever caucuses do\u2014so there certainly was an opportunity. Thirdly\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220434b304991f49d2be044da8dccc4f7e\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Where was it on that Order Paper?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226851a94e213049a6861b450845019824\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Just let me finish. Thirdly, this meets neither the urgency day rule nor the chronological rule. It does not meet either of those. But the member has raised a point to which some consideration may need to be given, but not at this point. I suggest that the Standing Orders Committee would be an ideal vehicle for that matter to be teased out, because in this case I can rule only on the Speakers\u2019 rulings, the Standing Orders, and other literary records that I have in front of me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226a50a4e773f246c38e1a75e91a3ccfb3\u0022\u003ESchedule 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002230321875512c4919956e8ba96ec247e7\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00223496cd941ce4438a924ed6aed35596ad\u0022\u003ESchedule 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002286b7c99525084495a197a45bd1bf4840\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d7f9c0ce735c40dd83485f95830cc895\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u0022e927f8de0d964b76978b80674d88a121\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e927f8de0d964b76978b80674d88a121\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Amongst the Supplementary Order Papers that are on the Table in respect of the title of this bill is a late proposal by the Government to change the name of the underlying legislation from the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act to the Accident Compensation Act, and I want to explore that proposal. I think we need to look historically at why the current bill name came to be. In my mind there is not much doubt that if members look historically they will see that, following the passage of the original accident compensation law, New Zealand took its eye off the ball when it came to injury prevention. Prior to accident compensation, of course, there was a fiscal cost to employers through the risk of court action as a consequence of injured workers suing them, which meant that they kept a good eye on injury prevention. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EAfter the accident compensation legislation came in, there was a period when New Zealand\u2019s accident rate in the workplace did not follow the same trend as was the case in overseas jurisdictions. For that reason, Governments of the day, including the Labour Government, decided that there was a need for more interventions to make sure that we achieved what I think everyone in this Parliament would want to achieve, which is lower accident rates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EOne of the things that was done was that more focus was put on the enforcement of appropriate workplace safety through the Department of Labour, using its regulatory function to ensure better workplace practices so as to reduce accidents. But another thing that was done was a change within the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) to a greater focus on injury prevention, and it has worked. Following the changes that the last Labour Government made in terms of both more regulatory action via the Department of Labour and more focus within ACC on injury prevention, that combination of efforts has meant that rather than the trend in New Zealand workplaces going in the wrong direction\u2014that is, separating from the international trend, where New Zealand workplaces were not improving in their safety at the same rate as was being achieved in other places, including Australia\u2014we actually had improved outcomes and less injury. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI will give an example of where the Government is now reversing that trend, and I think this is a shocking example. It relates to a programme that was developed at the University of Otago Faculty of Medicine, and has now been rolled out through most parts of New Zealand. It is the Otago Exercise Programme for falls prevention. We heard the Minister acknowledge in this Chamber in just the last few days that more than the work account, it is the non-earners account that has increasing costs, largely as a consequence of the elderly growing older and many of those elderly falling over in their homes and breaking a hip.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc2b04517d7e462496bffe1427896ce9\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, what a generalist statement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2acbabdeb214db6a8a9217d085e9ed8\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: That has additional medical costs and home-care costs. Sandra Goudie derides that, but it has been acknowledged by ACC at recent financial reviews that one of the great problem areas is the growth in falls by the elderly in their homes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EA programme developed by the University of Otago Faculty of Medicine is directly targeted at the most at-risk group, which is made up of people who are more than 80 years old, who have already had a fall, and who have been identified by their doctor as needing an intervention. It is an inexpensive intervention, and unlike most of these programmes it has had extensive peer-reviewed studies by scientists as to its efficacy. That has led to articles in the British Medical Journal, no less, highlighting the programme as an example of injury prevention work that is cost-effective. Indeed the cost-benefit analysis shows that for every $1 spent, $2 is saved in the health system in the year following. Yet this Government has cut the funding, saying that the programme cannot be afforded. It is nonsense economics. This will see the costs of the accident compensation scheme going up, and that is one of the reasons why the Government wants to go back to talking about this being the Accident Compensation Amendment Act, rather than the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThe reality is that we are now heading back to the time in New Zealand when insufficient attention was paid to injury prevention. As a consequence, New Zealand will go back to where it was under the last National Government. The trends in respect of injury prevention will be bad, and therefore the trends in terms of the growing number of injuries and the growing costs of injuries will remain. As a consequence, costs will go up rather than come down. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u00223440a3976622415ab3c9f8c2734abb39\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223440a3976622415ab3c9f8c2734abb39\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Clause 1 of the bill that came back from the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee is: \u201CTitle: This Act is the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Act 2009.\u201D At the initial stages, in tabling the bill for the first time, the Government clearly did not think it was an issue to keep the name as it had been. At the select committee and the second reading, the Government clearly did not think it was an issue to keep the name the same. Come the Committee stage, the Minister in charge of the bill, the Minister for ACC, lodged a Supplementary Order Paper to change the title to the Accident Compensation Amendment Act 2010, and proceeded to perform like a seal about how important it was that the bill would now be called the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. He made a song and dance about it, and he enunciated in the most exaggerated terms he could possibly manage that people on the street would not know what the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act was. Now it is imperative that it be called the Accident Compensation Act! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EMy question to the Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister for ACC, is why this change suddenly became important. I say to the Associate Minister that it leaves the Opposition thinking that there is an agenda. I quote somebody who is rather more famous than me: \u201CWhat\u2019s in a name? that which we call a rose, By any other name would smell as sweet;\u201D. There is as much difference between the names Labour and National as there is between the names Montague and Capulet, which is what Shakespeare was talking about. There is as much difference between Labour and National over the title of this bill as there is between the names Montague and Capulet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis change raises questions about the agenda, and I would like to ask two questions apropos of this name change. What are we to read into this change? If the legislation is to be called the Accident Compensation Act, are we now to understand that there is to be no injury prevention, rehabilitation, or compensation? Or are we to understand that anything that is an accident will be covered by this legislation? I ask whether the Minister has considered\u2014and whether this has an impact on fiscal aggregates\u2014the term \u201Ccerebrovascular accident\u201D, commonly known as a stroke. Does this change in the name of the bill indicate that the Government is looking to include strokes, otherwise known as cerebrovascular accidents, in the coverage of the compensation? If so, the Government should say so, and it should prove that there is no fiscal aggregate impact from that change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EMy second question is: if only accidents are to be covered by this legislation and not injuries, where does that leave sexual abuse victims, who sustain injuries but never by accident? Sexual abuse does not occur by accident; it is perpetrated upon victims and it creates injuries. At the very least, it creates mental injuries. Are we to assume by this change of name that there is some agenda to move stealthily and without any recourse to the public to take sexual abuse treatment out of accident compensation? That is the impact already of moves this Government has made in changing processes on treatment of sexual abuse victims. Already there are people who cannot get treatment and who risk suicide because they are unable to get treatment in a timely way, because people are waiting for decisions to be made about whether there is an injury. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u00229a0c33f0255a497990935b019530f801\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a0c33f0255a497990935b019530f801\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E While we are on the subject of quotations, I would like to offer the Committee one of my own. In response to a correspondent, the great writer Mark Twain stated: \u201CI notice that you use plain, simple language, short words and brief sentences. That is the way to write English\u2014it is the modern way and the best way. Stick to it; don\u2019t let fluff and flowers and verbosity creep in. When you catch an adjective, kill it.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI will follow up with another quote, because of all of the discussion we have had about the royal commission\u2019s report. Owen Woodhouse wrote these words, and I think they are the most enduring of all of them: \u201CInjury arising from accident demands an attack on three fronts. The most important is obviously prevention. Next in importance is the obligation to rehabilitate the injured. Thirdly, there is the duty to compensate them for their losses.\u201D Having stressed that injury prevention was obviously the most important component of any framework, Owen Woodhouse then called the royal commission report, Compensation for personal injury in New Zealand. He did not need the \u201Cfluffery\u201D of adding \u201Cinjury prevention, rehabilitation, and compensation\u201D, or this, that, and the next thing. He called it by a simple title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EThe House of the time, in passing the legislation, did what? Did it give the legislation an extra-long title? No, it did not. In highlighting the importance of injury prevention, it said \u201CLet us call this Act the Accident Compensation Act 1972.\u201D It is pretty simple stuff, really. There is so much more about that Act that does not need to be packed into the title. In 2001, when it was given the present name, which was so long that the front page of the Act needed a concertina sort of shape, what was done was done nobly, I think. I do not think that anybody was under any illusions that the priorities were changing, and that the goal of preventing injuries remained. Sadly, we did not seem to have much luck; injury rates have continued to climb and rehabilitation rates have dropped, which is obviously the reason why we are in the Chamber debating this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EBut let us call the legislation what it is. The Act should be the Accident Compensation Act. Nobody on the street understands it by any other name. They know \u201CACC\u201D by what it. Let us call it what it is, and let us resist any of these nonsensical suggestions that by giving it a simple name, the Government diminishes the importance of injury prevention. That is simply not the case. Nobody believes it; not even the Opposition believes it. I really strongly support this change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u002238254fbe507440a4a9aa2f6057863a9f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002238254fbe507440a4a9aa2f6057863a9f\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills):\u003C/span\u003E I begin by asking the Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister for ACC, a question but I doubt very much whether she will answer it because she seems to have been unable to find a contribution to make at all in this debate, despite being the Associate Minister. Her arm is moving; that indicates some form of life. But she does not seem to think that it is part of her responsibility\u2014despite collecting quarter of a million dollars, with a car and free travel, credit card, and all the other trappings that go with being a Minister\u2014to stand up in the debate and say why this is happening, why we are having this debate. But the question I have immediately for the Minister is where Gerry Brownlee is when you need him. Where is the Leader of the House, who felt obliged to come to the Chamber and have my Supplementary Order Paper ruled out of order, on the grounds that it would nearly bring the Government to its knees\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2c9f3dbfcc74963a9d7e6cbba586263\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Let us keep this reasonably good-natured, but the member is straying into two areas. The first is implying that a member is not here, and, secondly, speaking about a ruling that has been made. The member cannot do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248bead1c54364f0eb292f284b072a3b9\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON\u003C/span\u003E: So where is Gerry Brownlee\u2019s contribution when it is needed? Clearly, it is not being provided at the moment because if Gerry Brownlee was able to make a contribution in this debate, I am sure he would look at the amendment to the title and think about the huge impact on fiscal aggregate that this amendment from the Minister, the Hon Dr Nick Smith, will have. How much will it cost for every single letterhead, every single logo, every single front window, every single car, every single business card, and every single bit of paper\u2014including ones with perforated sides\u2014that currently have the existing logo and brand \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation\u201D\u2014to be altered? Gerry Brownlee is likely to be considering a contribution to this debate and having this amendment from the Minister ruled out. If it is good enough for the previous amendments to be ruled out, it is certainly good enough for this one. But if we were able to put aside the huge impact on fiscal aggregate that this amendment will have, even though it will be debated and then voted on, by the sounds of the current lack of contribution from the Leader of the House, then the Committee would be asking why we are doing this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EAt the very time when the focus of the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has moved from looking at accidents as things that just happen and we pay out compensation for them, why are we not moving that culture to say that a prime responsibility of the corporation, as outlined in the original Woodhouse commission report, was that injury prevention should come first? That is what the commission said. That is why the name was changed to reflect what should be the primary responsibility and focus of the corporation, as it should be for the leadership position of the Minister and the Associate Minister, to drive injury prevention. I do not think that anybody in the Chamber would want to see anyone injured; even in the most heated moments of debate we would not wish any harm on any of our political opponents. But without that focus in the name, the corporation lost its way. It did not refer back to the original intent of the commission. Now, it has looked to the title of its mandating legislation and said injury prevention comes first. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EWhat should be the second responsibility of the corporation? It should be rehabilitation. It should make sure that when people have the misfortune of an injury, despite the best efforts of any injury prevention programme, there is a fundamental responsibility to try to restore injured people to the greatest extent possible to their pre-injury earning capacity. We must make them as well as we can make them and restore them from their injury to as much as possible their pre-injury situation. So injury prevention should be the corporation\u2019s No. 1 focus. Rehabilitation should be its second, and compensation for loss of earnings or earning capacity should be its third role. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EUnder this amendment, and under the now new title\u2014yet another leap backwards into the 1990s\u2014we see that the title of the Act will be the Accident Compensation Act. What does that say from this Parliament to the corporation? What does it say to the general public? What does it say to the leading injury prevention and rehabilitation specialists? The message from the Hon Dr Nick Smith and the Hon Pansy Wong is: \u201CWe don\u2019t care any more about injury prevention and rehabilitation. We don\u2019t care about it to the extent that we\u2019re even prepared to change the name of the mandating legislation, so that the message is \u2018accident compensation\u2019\u2014end of story.\u201D That is not a good enough message. We have people, day in, day out, who are injured, often permanently, often severely. People lose their lives in incidents that we could prevent, such as children who are killed on quad bikes and children who drown. People lose their limbs in incidents that could be prevented. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EMy colleague the Hon David Parker spoke of a fantastic programme that was funded in part by ACC, and in part by local authorities and other Government departments and agencies. The programme focused on a group of people who were often neglected in the past in terms of injury prevention. The reason they were often neglected was that they do not cost the corporation much money, because they do not receive earnings-related compensation\u2014that is, people over 80. People over 80 often fall and break their hips. They do not cost much, so they were never in the past a priority. The previous Labour Government changed that. We said that those people were important in society. They have contributed, all of their lives, to our country and to their communities. They have raised families, many of them have fought overseas on our behalf, and we should not write them off just because they are over 80. So we put a focus on a critical area of injury prevention for those people through the National Falls Prevention Strategy. I say all credit to Otago University for the amazing work\u2014led, in particular, by Professor A John Campbell\u2014that was done with that injury prevention programme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe programme stopped large numbers of senior citizens falling over and often breaking their hip. If older people fall and break their hip, they have a lot of pain, they have to have a lot of surgical intervention, and the most telling thing is that they never fully regain their confidence again. They rapidly decline in terms of their ability to get up, get out of bed, and get out and about because that fall has shaken more than their bones; that fall shakes their confidence. Why would we want to let that happen when we know that it can be prevented by a very simple, internationally well-regarded, falls prevention programme? I do not know the answer to that question, because the National Government scrapped the programme, not the Labour Government. This Government said to over 80-year-olds that it does not care any more about their falls prevention programme, and that it does not care about injury prevention at all, actually. It scrapped the small amount of funding that was keeping so many of those people out of danger and out of hospital and giving them an opportunity to lead a much fuller life. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThose issues are at the heart of my concern about the change in the title. Many people might ask who cares about the name change. Well, if we cared as little as that, then we would not be debating it in Parliament. It is more than the name of a statute on the books of this House. It is about the message we give about what is important as the legislative mandate for the corporation and its staff throughout the country. It is about what this Parliament thinks is a priority. I do not think we should say that if it is an accident, it just happens. I think we should say that these are injuries and, in many, many instances, they can be prevented. It should be a moral responsibility of this Parliament to make it a legislative responsibility of the corporation to have injury prevention as its highest priority. None of us wants to see anyone being injured, so we should take the next logical step to make sure the law reflects that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u0022dbb0436b3c2549a8b79200f379ee3637\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dbb0436b3c2549a8b79200f379ee3637\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to explain to the Government why Labour feels so offended about this proposed name change. The name of the principal Act was changed by the previous Labour Government, as members have pointed out. What was the name of the law relating to accident compensation before that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002251d1bfb735ee42039bc8555aa8c7f6b7\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: It was the privatised name.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ece2d57b91d4ee88cf9dfa69a7ec763\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. It was the Accident Insurance Act, which described exactly how National saw accident compensation then and how those members still see it. They see workers\u2019 livelihoods and their injuries as tradable commodities. We are upset about the new name, because it means that National has not changed. We know that before the last election National was meeting with business and the insurance industry, and we know that it was making promises about privatising the work account.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe message that we receive from Supplementary Order Paper 111 is that the focus is coming off the things that the previous Labour Government worked so hard on, which my colleague Ruth Dyson so eloquently described, and is going back to the accident compensation scheme being opened up to competition and to private insurers. We heard that kind of language. We heard the statement that it is not supposed to be a welfare scheme; it is an insurance scheme. That is what the Government says all the time. That is what Government members like to say about this scheme all the time. So we are worried about the change of name.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI ask members opposite what is so complicated about the existing name. What is not simple about the words \u201Cinjury prevention\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c703b16073934c368643f75371bebbc1\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: I know we\u2019re doing the right thing when we know you\u2019re worried.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212843c13250c4174bfed5f71715bd9ab\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: What does the member Sandra Goudie not understand about injury prevention? Maybe she does not have any idea about what it means, why it is important, or why Labour made it the first priority of our accident compensation scheme. The first priority is to prevent accidents, particularly in the workplace, but what are we seeing from this Government? We know that the priority has gone off injury prevention. We know that Government members do not care about it. They are cutting, cutting, cutting\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243265f44acfc44f1b6fc03196fcba678\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: She didn\u2019t care about how she wasted billions of dollars.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ddbbefe2dfbf494f801ce4ddb58bf4ae\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Is it a waste of millions of dollars to prevent injuries? Due to funding cuts, training for workplace health and safety representatives has been cut from 6,000 places down to 2,000. What did we hear in the last quarter? The Minister of Labour said that she was worried about the increase in workplace accidents. Well, surprise, surprise! If we take the focus off injury prevention and start making cuts to workplace health and safety training, then we will see more of that. It is an utter disgrace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe second word is easy to understand. It is a simple word: \u201Crehabilitation\u201D. What is so hard to understand about it? Why do members opposite not like this word? They want to ignore the fact that our scheme is trying to get people back to work, back to their ordinary jobs, and back to being productive members of the community. That is what rehabilitation is. That is why rehabilitation is the second platform of the previous Labour Government\u2019s requirements of the scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe final word must not be hard to understand, because National has retained it in the changed name. It is compensation. It is the last resort. When people can no longer go back to work or are recovering from an accident, they are compensated so that they can feed their families and put their lives back together. They can plan for the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThose three terms in the current title prioritise the purpose of our 24-hour, no-fault accident compensation scheme. People can understand why members on this side of the Chamber are particularly upset about the change in name, because it indicates the change of focus that we knew was coming. From the kind of language that has been used, from the discussions that have happened in the debate, we knew that the change was coming, and the Minister for ACC has confirmed that with his Supplementary Order Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI will be putting forward some amendments to the title, and I suggest a few alternatives.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268193f5c85934c2297047a1c2ef1fd2a\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Hope they don\u2019t have any fiscal impacts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cdd34ddcd7b445fc9f887af994bbcc29\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. One alternative, for example, would be the \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, Compensation, and Experience-Ratings Amendment Act 2010\u201D. We have talked about experience-ratings in the debate. We are concerned about what risk rating meant in the 1990s, when we had experience-rating, and how it affected people. It affected the behaviour of employers and workers, but it did not bring the accident rate down; it increased.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u002248cf6847ebd4451c9410c5699da0abe3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002248cf6847ebd4451c9410c5699da0abe3\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I congratulate my colleague Darien Fenton on reminding us about the name change made under the previous National Government in terms of our accident compensation scheme. I join with my colleagues in questioning the Government about why this current change is necessary. Members opposite may call us suspicious, but I ask why, when this amending bill came to the House called the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill, suddenly there is a need to change the title of the principal Act by cutting out those words and calling it the Accident Compensation Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThe Minister for ACC got to his feet yesterday\u2014I note that he is not speaking as much on the bill today\u2014and said that the reason is that is what the Act used to be called. That is the National Government\u2019s answer: that is what it used to be called. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022002668ddee6549439980da4baee45663\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: This is the brains trust.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ed1bc3f5425468cb0507d97f94a5174\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: The brains trust came up with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI am sure that all MPs care about communities. Surely they want to build on and improve on what was there before. I know that that is what inspired members on this side of the Chamber to come to Parliament: to advocate to improve the lives of New Zealanders. The Act was called that before. Improvements have been made over the years\u2014though, admittedly, only under the previous Labour Government\u2014to this wonderful social contract for New Zealanders. But this Government is intent on cutting back those improvements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EMy colleagues have asked what the Government\u2019s removal of the words \u201CInjury Prevention\u201D from the title tells us. What does \u201Cinjury prevention\u201D mean? We have already seen cuts to injury prevention schemes. We have already seen that happen under the current Act. We have already seen cuts to education programmes for older people about avoiding accidents. We have already seen much of the funding cut for schemes that worked. What does that make us think? I note what else we have seen cut. We have seen cuts in training for the delegates who are involved in health and safety in the workplace. They are involved in working towards ensuring that people have a very healthy workplace. The removal of the words \u201CInjury Prevention\u201D might make us think that this is what this Government is about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWhy would a Government remove the word \u201CRehabilitation\u201D? It is absolutely the key principle of what is behind any social contract to do with accidents. It is not about rewarding compo. That view is so old-fashioned, it is not funny. Yes, people must be compensated. We note that, but we have already drawn attention to the fact that many people will not receive the compensation that they are entitled to, particularly if they have committed suicide. There are already claw-backs to do with compensation for seasonal workers and holiday pay, especially the provision that means people will have to use their holiday pay before they receive compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EBut as well as those claw-backs, it seems to this side of the Chamber that the Government is saying that it does not want rehabilitation in the legislation. All it says to me and my colleagues is that this Government does not believe in investing in rehabilitation. We are already seeing examples of that under the current Act. But when it is no longer part of the title of the Act\u2014when and if the bill goes through, which it will unless there is a big change of mind from the Government and the ACT Party\u2014then I make no bones about the fact that rehabilitation will go further and further down the agenda. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EIt just makes a mockery of a scheme that has worked and that has delivered for so many New Zealanders. It has assisted them to be work-ready, to be working and to fully participate in our society and workplaces, and to effectively support their families. I too have some amendments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u00226e6ce86d866f48d79acb06f02ef22a9f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e6ce86d866f48d79acb06f02ef22a9f\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am happy to take a call on the title and commencement clauses of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. I will first remark on a comment that was made by the Hon Tony Ryall, the Minister of Health. When my colleague Maryan Street was using an analogy from Romeo and Juliet, the Hon Tony Ryall said: \u201CYes, but they ended up together in the end\u201D. That is true, I say to the Minister\u2014but they were dead. In terms of the analogy for accident compensation, I think it is particularly worrying if the Minister of Health thinks that is a good outcome. It is everyone\u2019s happy ending; it is great\u2014apart from the small fact that they were both dead. I think that sums up Labour\u2019s concerns about where this legislation is taking us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EMy colleagues have talked about the Minister\u2019s insistence that the name of this legislation needs to be changed. We worry about a seemingly innocuous move on the Minister\u2019s part because the mere fact that a Supplementary Order Paper is put forward will lengthen the debate in this part of the Committee stage. The Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister for ACC, and the Leader of the House, Gerry Brownlee, have already been in the Chamber desperately trying to shut down the debate and shut down the amount of time we spend debating. It is not a small move for a Minister to come here with a Supplementary Order Paper and put it on the Table\u2014it opens things up for a longer debate, so there must be some reason that he is doing it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe Hon Pansy Wong, the Minister in the chair, has refused to take a call in this debate. I think someone should place a mirror under her nose and check that she is still breathing, just so we can be certain there is not something more serious going on, because normally the Committee stage is about debate. It is the one time that the Opposition gets to question a Minister and, hopefully, get a response, and she has refused to do that. Therefore, we have to try to ascertain why the name is being changed from Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe reason, I think, is that the Government is softening up accident compensation for privatisation. We know the Government wants to privatise accident compensation. It did so the last time it was in Government and it desperately wants to do it again. It got a lot of campaign donations from Australian insurance companies that will benefit to the tune of billions of dollars from picking up the work that is currently done by the Accident Compensation Corporation in New Zealand at a cheaper, lower administrative cost and a lower cost to the levy payers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aed42c98fe5c445c8f3c8216f666f2a3\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I am, again, reluctant to do this with one of my colleagues. But it has long been the case that the motives of the Government cannot be challenged. The linking of direct donations for policy is something that would certainly indicate a lack of integrity on the part of the Government. Although the Government whips and the Minister in the chair at the moment, the Minister for ACC, might want to accept that as a fact, I think it is a reflection on the House. Any suggestion that this is a policy-for-money approach, as has been made by my colleague, is, in my opinion, out of order. I know that you were temporarily distracted, Mr Chair. The Minister was clearly listening. I know that the junior Government whip was clearly listening. She appeared to be nodding; I am not sure whether she was going off to sleep or agreeing. But it does seem to me that impugning the motives of the Minister and saying that he and his party are getting cash for the policy is something that implies corruption and probably should not be allowed to continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b79e7310377b4cb5afb89e3df902e133\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: The first point is that Government members did not raise a point of order because we give little credibility to this assertion, which has been made on repeated occasions. Furthermore, Mr Chairman, I think you should take note that the reason Mr Mallard chose to raise a point of order, far from actually upholding the principles of the House, was to do exactly the opposite. It was simply to give him the opportunity to recite those quite wrong and unparliamentary allegations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aabbeeac17104586b887f4f64d2e2cad\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Firstly, can I say in response to Mr Mallard\u2019s point of order that questioning people\u2019s motives is not a unique event in this Parliament. In fact, a time when members\u2019 motives for putting forward legislation or amendments were not spoken about would be a remarkable period of time. So motivation, in my view, is a legitimate part of debate for this Committee. The second point that the member alludes to, but not directly, is that it is contrary to the Standing Orders to imply or say directly that people in this Chamber are controlled by outside interests. I do think that the member speaking fell well short of that. I take the point that has been made by Mr Mallard that this House is brought into disrepute by some of those assertions or that implication. I will not pull the member up on it, but I do think the member should be circumspect. An attack on any particular member\u2019s motives in the House is an attack on all members of the House. I think the member should be mindful of the decorum of this place and the standard of debate that the public would expect. The member will continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259790d25889e4ff1b68f7ac4062e33d2\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I am happy to do so. I think we are very lucky that we have the Hon Trevor Mallard as a moral conscience of this Committee to keep us all on the straight and narrow when the Government fails to do so. I say to the Hon Nick Smith that if he is so upset about these allegations he should stop hiding the money in trusts and let New Zealand people see where the National Party\u2019s money is coming from. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI will carry on. The reason, I believe, that the Hon Nick Smith wants to change the title of the Act from the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act is so that when he privatises the scheme, there is absolutely no onus on the new Australian owners of the scheme to carry out those activities. He is clearing the decks and making it clear that all they will have to be in charge of is paying out money. Let me preface that comment by saying that insurance companies make money by not paying out and by refusing claims, and that is the future for New Zealand workers under this National Government when it comes to workers\u2019 compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe Hon Nick Smith is sending a very clear message that the new owners will not have to carry out injury prevention and rehabilitation. All the niceties and all the weasel words saying that that is not right and the Government still thinks injury prevention is fantastic does not hide the fact that injury prevention is being cut by this Government now. That sends a very strong message. If all the National members who took calls\u2014and there were not many of them\u2014were genuinely concerned about saving money, then surely they would see that injury prevention is the way to do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EIt makes far more sense to spend a bit of money keeping people well. Let us be clear that every single piece of analysis of the programmes that were in place\u2014my colleague Ruth Dyson mentioned the falls prevention programmes\u2014were working. They were saving money. So to say that this is all about saving money is ridiculous when we consider that this Government has cut the very programmes that do save money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EIf I were to come up with an alternative title for this piece of legislation, I think I would probably come up with a title along the lines of the \u201CACC (Kiss Your Holidays Goodbye) Amendment Bill\u201D. I do not think the Minister for ACC is being completely up front with people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022 data-id=\u00228b4bde33d9d945028c527fd9e424ffb0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228b4bde33d9d945028c527fd9e424ffb0\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour\u2014New Lynn):\u003C/span\u003E I wonder, in speaking to this part, which seeks a name change to the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill, whether I could divert the Committee with a little homily on pre-parliamentary experience. It is relevant. Before becoming a member of Parliament I was a management consultant and worked for an insurance company over the ditch that specialised in accident insurance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b55b020fbd9479dbe0b9a8798ed5ec3\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Not HIH?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b8ba50561064e2fa278cead3b92609e\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: I could not possibly comment, but no, it was not that one. The key point to make is there were three functions that needed to be undertaken that fit nicely with the name that is proposed by our side: the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill. In looking at injury prevention, rehabilitation, and compensation, we see that the first of those functions speaks to getting upstream and making sure that the environment is safer, that people\u2019s costs are minimised, and that personal harm is minimised. A stitch in time saves nine, and the investment in public information and public education pays huge dividends. So it proved to be. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThe second of those functions, rehabilitation, is absolutely critical, especially on claims that are required for moderately serious injuries. A very small injury can often be fixed on the day, within 24 hours and out of the door at a walk-in clinic. A moderately serious claim may require many weeks, months, or sometimes years of rehabilitation to get people back to work so that they can pay their way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThe third category was the very serious claims that required intensive, often lifetime, management and compensation. That company was able to minimise the cost to its shareholders and the Crown by undertaking all three of those functions diligently, as does, I believe, our accident compensation scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThe issue with this name change is that it underplays two of those absolutely vital functions. It collects the burden on the organisation under the third function. Compensation should be the last cab off the rank, not the first. If it does that, it will not be good for New Zealanders who either are not educated to avoid accidents before they occur or are not rehabilitated to the same extent after they occur, and we are left with what will be both increased human suffering and increased fiscal risk because the organisation will not be fitted as well to do its job. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EWe can imagine that the motivation for National in suggesting the name change that Dr Smith has suggested in his amendment is not drawn from the library of Mark Twain. I suspect that it is not a stylistic amendment. By all reports, this is a busy Government that has much on its plate. Would that Minister really spend his time on a purely semantic amendment? Quite obviously, there is a broader game afoot. Things are not always as they seem and I think New Zealanders are finding that the penny is already dropping for them. Here is a Government that is bent on cutting and trimming the services that our accident compensation scheme makes available, that it has interpreted in the most negative way. From the chair on down, in regard to the financial circumstances of the corporation, it has put the most pessimistic assumptions before the public and has used that as a pretext to undertake a rash of cuts. New Zealanders are deeply disturbed that the social contract is being broken. As well as that, it makes absolutely no sense to do it in economic or management terms, as this name change suggests. Each of the functions of preventing accidents, rehabilitating those who are injured, and only then fairly and fully compensating those who cannot be rehabilitated, are equally important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EIf there is no human interest reason for the proposed change and if there can be no managerial or economic reason for it, I ask what it is. One of my colleagues has suggested that perhaps it is a pretext for privatisation. We know, and there is nothing outside the Standing Orders in recalling for the Parliament, that Merrill Lynch, a firm not unknown to the current Prime Minister, advised its clients in the insurance industry that there were hundreds of millions of dollars of profit to be made should this Government proceed with privatising the New Zealand accident compensation scheme. That would be a tragedy for New Zealanders. The only beneficiary would be those Australian insurance companies or their like, and that cannot be allowed to happen, for the sake of New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u0022eac60ca081834acc8a4d0d7f02d24e71\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eac60ca081834acc8a4d0d7f02d24e71\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Labour\u2014Dunedin North):\u003C/span\u003E I have a couple of questions for the Minister for ACC. I will give them at the outset and then spend a little time trying to convince him that it is not a bad idea to answer them. The first question is: why change the name? We have been saying to the Minister that we think he has changed the name for this reason, that we think he has changed the name for that reason, and that we think he should have left the name alone for the other reason. We have been at that for a while and we have had no response. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe second question is: when was the name changed? The last time a National Government took the axe to the accident compensation system was in the 1990s, when the Rt Hon William Birch had a go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e4d3ac05f4147e18c6413ec19dbc361\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Nick Smith was there, too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d75fc181bdce42d7a47bca8ab79520c0\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Nick Smith was there, I was there, and a few others in the Committee were there. The name change, which put the word \u201Cinsurance\u201D in the title, was made up front at the outset.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4c50b0bac9b4038b28c4c2d4226a650\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Always.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4fb8feb9dfa4dfca23493c6d8f92a19\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Maurice Williamson agrees with me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a19c407981946d0a514ed84a7ff0bef\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s not old enough to remember, is he?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219a9fb6a91b648d4a053332e38d0a3fe\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Maurice Williamson is old enough to remember. It is clear that the Government had a policy shift afoot and wanted to reflect that policy shift in the title, so it did. It was upfront, which gave us months to say that it should not have done it, as it is not an insurance scheme; it is a social contract. That debate continues to this day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EBut not this time. This time the Government is taking the axe to the accident compensation system in all its totality. It is changing the first couple of words of the title of the bill from \u201CInjury Prevention\u201D to \u201CAccident Compensation\u201D. I would like to know when the Minister decided to do that, and I gently challenge the Minister with the proposition that he had decided all along that he would change the name. He has, after all, had to be across this portfolio very tightly because he was the person who said that the accident compensation scheme was broken. No one else agreed with him, but he said it and he stuck with it. He ran that line hard and fast. He then decided to proceed with the legislative changes that are in front of us today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe Minister started this issue, so he has been across the issue for about 15 months. I wonder whether it is within the bounds of credibility that within that time he did not at some stage have some conversation, either with himself or someone else, about the name change. I suspect he did, yet the legislation as introduced into the House was the same, and no change was made to the title by Government members of the select committee. I am not aware of submissions calling for a name change. There may have been some; it would be interesting to know, if the Minister would like to tell us about them. I suspect that the Minister had the name change in his back pocket all along. I think the Minister decided that he would do a little quickie and make the name change on the floor of the Chamber towards the end of the legislative process. That is my challenge. I would not call it as strong as an accusation, but I would like the Minister to get up and give us his side of the story. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThose are my two questions: why did the Government believe that a name change was a good idea, and when did the Government\u2014or, indeed, the Minister\u2014decide to change the name? I wonder whether the Minister would care to indicate whether he would like to respond to me. If he does not want to respond, I am happy to continue with the debate, and I thank the Chair for allowing me the opportunity to do so. However, as soon at the Minister twitches a muscle, I will happily sit down. I am just making that clear to the Minister and to the Chair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EOn the substantial issue of the name change, I think an important point to make is that, as with the health system, prevention is where the cheap benefits come. Prevention is a cost-effective activity; compensation is not a cost-effective activity. I want to know from the Government why it has chosen something that is determinedly and systematically inefficient. This Government is preoccupied with economic growth and with catching up with Australia, yet with this name change it has arguably chosen an approach that is known to be less efficient. If there is to be a downturn, a downsizing, or a reduction in attention to injury prevention, or if more programmes of the ilk of the University of Otago Faculty of Medicine falls prevention programme are to be cut, I want the Minister to explain to the Committee why he thinks that will be economically efficient. I tell members to notice how I am choosing my language. In essence, this is a social portfolio, but I ask the Minister why he thinks that would be more economically efficient.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u002266b72ff66b284510b9f9c518bafdbd57\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002266b72ff66b284510b9f9c518bafdbd57\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (Junior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u00229eeb4b94909f4ccdbce075658a127a34\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229eeb4b94909f4ccdbce075658a127a34\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to add my concern to the concerns that have been raised about why we are removing very important words from the title of this bill\u2014words like \u201Cinjury prevention\u201D and \u201Crehabilitation\u201D\u2014but I want to take a slightly different approach. I intend in this contribution to tie this issue back to some of the strategic priorities of the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), because I wonder what the implications of this message the Minister is sending are for the corporation and its work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIn relation to injury prevention, I say that that is clearly the way we could make a real difference to cost containment. Cost containment is supposedly one of the major drivers for many of the changes in this bill; there is very little other justification for some of the arbitrary, unfair, and discriminatory provisions in the bill. When it comes down to it, we are told that the reason for the bill is cost containment. The provision around holidays will save $1 million a year, so that is a cost containment measure, but even Treasury wonders whether such a small saving is worth it for the unfairness of the provision. That was the advice given.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EBut I go back to the words \u201Cinjury prevention\u201D. These are the most fundamental words that should be in the name of this bill, and of any bill to do with accident compensation, because injury prevention is where it should start. Injury prevention is more than just cost containment. Obviously it is the most effective way of containing cost but, more important, it is about ensuring that people do not have accidents\u2014that people do not get hurt, that they do not die at work, and that they do not lose their parents, spouse, or child through workplace fatalities, see them severely incapacitated through workplace accidents, or see them lose income from being off work for a period of time. Injury prevention is about people\u2019s lives and protecting people, yet submitter after submitter has said that injury prevention is what is missing here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI will finalise my comments in relation to injury prevention by noting that a strategic priority of ACC is to work to reduce injuries and occupational diseases. I wonder what this title is saying in relation to that strategic priority. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227ba499e058245ed97c8dc7973769e85\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: We have a number of amendments in the name of Darien Fenton, which propose to change and amend the title of the bill. I draw members\u2019 attention to a Standing Order on page 27: \u201Cpreliminary clauses means the title clause and the commencement clause and, if applicable, a principal Act clause\u201D\u2014so this preliminary clause is the title clause. The second issue here is that the amendments that are going to make changes must not to be an attempt to criticise the contents. They must be a serious or objective description of the bill rather than simply being an attempt to relitigate issues and criticise the contents. Accordingly, the following amendments have been ruled out. These are the amendments that insert words as follows: \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Reduced Emphasis on Rehabilitation to Reduce Costs) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Primary of Cost Reduction) Amendment Act 2010\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218e0badfe57e4af0a6fb6b529d963cf3\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I am sorry to interrupt you, but just from the point of view of being helpful, could you repeat the Standing Order you are quoting; 27, I thought you said, is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022223196c816e24dc1b909514279069064\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: No, page 22. I am ahead of myself a little bit on that, because this will come up later\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002285ce26008a264ce997d1fb804087dfdc\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: So you are going to move through the different amendments to the amendment, in the names of the different members, and say which ones are not consistent, in your view as Chairman.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022393e8884c3854e989e44aaa2f8809885\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The first ones we are dealing with here are amendments that attempt to criticise the contents of the bill; amendments have to be serious and in order. If they are an attempt to relitigate issues or criticise the bill, the Speakers\u2019 rulings are that they are out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e574eec4e7c943e082cea90ee6159d59\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: And you are going to do that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200fb65da648e4dd4b4b961da2e76c5df\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I am going to go through and explain them. In the first amendment I have ruled out just the words in brackets \u201C(Reduced Emphasis on Rehabilitation to Reduce Costs)\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e84d87b635664ec082e9fa5d661a2309\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: In whose name is that one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230cacd7b53524e02bb880956921eabd5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Darien Fenton. I am dealing with ones by Darien Fenton at this stage. The amendments that seek to insert the words \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Experience Ratings) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Alignment with Commercial Insurance Practices) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Alignment with Australian Practices) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Non-Work and Work Account Cost Shifting) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Holiday Pay Exhausted Before Compensation Paid) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Removal of Cover For Those Who Attempt Suicide) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Reduction of Cover for those With Hearing Impairments) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, and \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Removal of Cover For Those Who Attempt Suicide, Reduction of Cover For Those With Hearing Impairments, Holiday Pay Exhausted Before Compensation Paid and Non-Work and Work Account Cost Shifting) Amendment Act 2010\u201D are ruled out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI now move to the amendment that is in order from Darien Fenton\u2014that is, the amendment to amend the title of the Act to \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Rebalancing Between Non-Work and Work Accounts) Amendment Act 2010\u201D. That is in order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022c0b6dee258ce410dbb006eebd2ef21c1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c0b6dee258ce410dbb006eebd2ef21c1\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I accept your comments about any titles or amendments that might be deemed to be taking away from the meaning of the bill\u2019s title as it currently stands. But in relation to amendments such as \u201CAlignment with Australian Practices\u201D, I note that we have a bill in the urgency motion relating to trans-Tasman proceedings and alignment. I do not mean to be flippant\u2014any reference to Australia by some New Zealanders would be considered offensive\u2014but I think I can say that this is a serious amendment, and it fits in with other bills that are on the urgency motion. It is hard to see how an alignment with Australian practices would be somehow demeaning. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EEqually, Mr Chairperson, the removal of cover for those who attempt suicide, and a reduction of cover for those with hearing impairments are statements of fact; that is what the legislation does. If it said \u201CThe Terrible and Unfair Removal of Cover for Those with Hearing Impairment\u201D, I think that would be inconsistent with the Standing Orders with regard to the way in which we would be putting a conjecture on the title. But simply for you to say that \u201CReduction of Cover for Those With Hearing Impairments\u201D is \u201Ccriticising\u201D, when there are clauses that state exactly that in the bill proper, makes it hard for us to see how that can be inconsistent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI am not going against the other points you have made. We accept that those are out of order\u2014the \u201CNon-work and Work Account Cost Shifting\u201D provision, for example\u2014but not those three particular ones. I would have thought that \u201CAlignment with Australian Practices\u201D was a very neutral phrase, and the \u201CReduction of Cover For Those With Hearing Impairments\u201D is\u2014political differences aside\u2014what the law does; the Minister has given speeches about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002291e725cdeaf84b9abf588fabe24f1bbb\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: In response to the member, I make two points. Firstly, the Chair\u2019s decision is final and no correspondence is entered into, but in this case I am happy to accept a point of order. The issue here is that the title is to describe the whole bill. This phrase describes an aspect of the bill; it is not an attempt to describe the whole bill. The title has to be an objective description of the bill, and when an amendment picks out just an aspect, it is to make a political point rather than to objectively describe the bill. The bill\u2019s title has to be a wide, generic term rather than contain specifics in the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe point I make again is that amendments are also ruled out when they attempt to highlight a point of difference in the debate or political differences over the bill. On that basis, I ruled out the amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00223d2b29027f0c47d688c46b376ab505c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223d2b29027f0c47d688c46b376ab505c6\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Thank you for your ruling on that\u2014that clears that aspect of it\u2014but can you advise the Committee? These are all amendments to the amendment. The Minister himself, Dr Smith, has put forward Supplementary Order Paper 111, which is a significant Supplementary Order Paper, and which in itself renames the legislation. I think it renames it the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill, when clearly there are clauses in respective parts of the bill that cover injury prevention and rehabilitation. So the name that the Minister\u2019s amendment chooses highlights just one aspect of what his law is doing\u2014because it is about accident compensation; it will give weekly compensation to people who have accidents\u2014but it takes away the words \u201CInjury Prevention\u201D and \u201CRehabilitation\u201D, which the Minister\u2019s law also covers. So how does it work when a conjecture is put on an Opposition amendment, but the amendment itself that we are trying to amend does equally the same thing? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3ddd5f431ce4fe09a6c426f0097e5c1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, in respect of the member\u2019s point, I tell him that one of the amendments that he objected to, for example, was the alignment with Australian practices. That is not a particular aspect of compensation; that relates to a point of view that people in this Chamber have or do not have. I come back to what I ruled: the amendment generally has to be an objective description of the bill, not a relitigation of particular points.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u0022bbcdcb8d1c8847f6b492d7b68cf23595\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bbcdcb8d1c8847f6b492d7b68cf23595\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Labour\u2014Dunedin North):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I have listened quite carefully to this, and of course it is your ruling, and I understand that you alone get to rule on it. That is clear to me. What I am seeking to understand, however, is whether an amendment to a title that said, for example, the \u201CAccident Compensation (Reduction of Certain Rights and Services) Act\u201D would be in order, on the grounds that although it points out something that the Government may not wish to see pointed out from a political lens, it is nonetheless a broad description of the essence of the legislation that is in front of us. Would a title of that ilk be deemed to be within the Standing Orders on the basis of your ruling?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c521afd3ed4845518439e05927dc2ebf\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Speakers\u2019 ruling 112/4 states: \u201CAn amendment to the title of a bill must be a serious or objective description of the bill rather than an attempt to criticise its contents.\u201D The point the member has made is that it is an attempt to criticise the contents. Whether the member believes it to be entirely true, or not, in the way the member has described it, it is a negative and therefore a criticism of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u00228db091d2434e4e7d9662763127e9621b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228db091d2434e4e7d9662763127e9621b\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Labour\u2014Dunedin North):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. That gets us somewhere further. What, then, if the House were generally to agree that this was a reduction in services and certain rights? If the Government held the view that that title was accurate, would that influence the Chair? How does the Chair decide whether a reduction in certain services and rights is an accurate but nonetheless pejorative entitlement for a piece of legislation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be20e223d4914d4ca77a6067fb0b2f3b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: If the Government was of that opinion, it would have moved it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u0022a572cc5e363146dbb5967ca7e300211f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a572cc5e363146dbb5967ca7e300211f\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Labour\u2014Dunedin North):\u003C/span\u003E Oh, no, that is not the point. If I might gently contest your view, I say to you that that is not an answer to my question, either. The question is: if an Opposition moves something that is in essence accurate\u2014that is to say, accurate in the terms that it is serious\u2014but is nonetheless pejorative, in the sense that it is critical, because Oppositions do that sort of thing, does that fall within the Standing Orders?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b8cee1d8cfb349d7ae93a63f411e0a3b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has answered his own question. I will pick up Speakers\u2019 ruling 112/4 and read it: \u201CAn amendment to the title of a bill must be a serious or objective description of the bill rather than an attempt to criticise its contents.\u201D A pejorative, by definition, is a criticism; it is a negative. So by the member\u2019s own words his objection fails, because it does not meet what Speakers\u2019 rulings have ruled before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u002259614dfba5384fe3b041034dd53d632a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259614dfba5384fe3b041034dd53d632a\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think we are getting somewhere on this, so please just hear me out. I think Mr Hodgson is putting to you the question of whether there is any test for an amendment to the title by a Government Minister on a bill. Supplementary Order Paper 111 changes the name of the principal Act and gives it an emphasis that does not marry off the other two things that the existing law does: injury prevention and rehabilitation. I think we are trying to ascertain whether an Opposition amendment can be struck out on the basis that it could be perceived as being a negative criticism. In a couple of ones that have been ruled out of order there was no criticism; they were just statements of fact. Does Speakers\u2019 ruling 112/4 apply equally to Government amendments, because once we have voted on the amendments to the amendments, we are going to shortly vote on an exact example of this from the other side of the Chamber?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246371010a28d4496bc56555a72de3041\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is correct, in that a Government amendment that was negative would be ruled out accordingly. But as I see the Government\u2019s amendment, it is not a negative. It might not traverse the ground the member desires to have in it, but it is not in itself a negative.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u00222318f6486d17405d8ccbf21325f5fd91\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222318f6486d17405d8ccbf21325f5fd91\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Labour\u2014Dunedin North):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I appreciate that we are testing your patience, but let me see where we might need to go. We might need to go to the Speaker now or at some later time to try to get clarity around this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe Speakers\u2019 ruling has two parts to it. You have read it out to us more than once, and I thank you for doing so. The two parts are that the amendment must achieve several things. It must be a serious amendment to the title. It must be a serious amendment that describes the legislation, on the one hand. Then the Speakers\u2019 ruling goes on to say that it must be that rather than a criticism of the legislation. Well, the problem the Opposition has is that a serious description of the title, an accurate description of the title, may be\u2014and we would assert, in this case, must be\u2014critical. So it is no fault of yours, dear Mr Chair, because it is a Speakers\u2019 ruling from earlier times. But the Speakers\u2019 ruling has two parts to it, as if one of the two must be true. In fact, it is easy to show that an accurate description of legislation must, in order to be accurate, also be critical. That is, in the essence of it, our conundrum. I say that the problem for you, Mr Chairman, if I may be so bold, is that you are obliged to choose one of the two parts of that dichotomy. We would assert that you should choose the other.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d6eed98a23f4cfeafff10cf77013672\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it is the Chair\u2019s decision. I have heard plenty on this. I want to make the point again that the amendments to the title are to be serious and objective descriptions, and are not to attempt to criticise the contents. Many of the amendments I have ruled out do exactly that; there is no question about that. There are some, and I am just coming to them, that are serious amendments in my opinion, and that do not attempt to directly criticise the contents. I want to move on to these.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Darien Fenton to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CAccident Compensation Amendment Act 2010\u201D and substitute \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Rebalancing Between Non-Work and Work Accounts) Amendment Act 2010\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225571f87d82794d6192b1c8eda0a65ce4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000602\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Darien Fenton to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000603\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CAccident Compensation Amendment Act 2010\u201D and substitute \u201CInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Urgent Changes) Amendment Act 2010\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c21bb8456ae34ffeb33513d2c1204d60\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022bfb708634d6a44c7a88d1a19c20f8050\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bfb708634d6a44c7a88d1a19c20f8050\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: We now move to the amendments in the name of Lynne Pillay. These, too, propose to amend the proposed amendment to the title of the bill, and are also ruled out of order as being either a criticism or a non-objective description of the bill. Those are the views of the Clerk, and I support the Clerk\u2019s views. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe following proposed substitutions in the name of Lynne Pillay are also ruled out of order: \u201CAccident Compensation (Reduced Emphasis on Rehabilitation to Reduce Costs) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation (Primary of Cost Reduction) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, Accident Compensation (Experience Ratings) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation (Alignment with Commercial Insurance Practices) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation (Alignment with Australian Practices) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation (Rebalancing Between Non-Work and Work Accounts) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation (Non-Work and Work Account Cost Shifting) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation (Holiday Pay Exhausted Before Compensation Paid) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation (Removal of Cover For Those Who Attempt Suicide) Amendment Act 2010, \u201CAccident Compensation (Reduction of Cover For Those With Hearing Impairments) Amendment Act 2010, and \u201CAccident Compensation (Removal of Cover For Those Who Attempt Suicide, Reduction of Cover For Those With Hearing Impairments, Holiday Pay Exhausted Before Compensation Paid and Non-Work and Work Account Cost Shifting) Amendment Act 2010\u201D. Further amendments to change the bill\u2019s proposed title back to the bill\u2019s original title are ruled out of order as that is a direct negative.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022fddd7d595ba84749b76844aaa57e707c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fddd7d595ba84749b76844aaa57e707c\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. One of the amendments to the Minister\u2019s proposed amendment that you ruled out of order was the Accident Compensation (Rebalancing Between Non-Work and Work Accounts) Amendment Act 2010. There was a similar amendment in Darien Fenton\u2019s name, which had that same language about a rebalancing between the non-work and work accounts, and which you allowed previously. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EMaybe while you are checking that, Mr Chairperson, I will also raise a point about the reference to \u201CExperience Ratings\u201D. Does that fall into the same category as your earlier ruling about it\u2014that of being only one part of the bill? It seems to me that that is not pejorative in any sense; it is a scheme that is funded by that method. But my primary point of order certainly relates to the amendment with regard to \u201CRebalancing Between Non-Work and Work Accounts\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00221bc19ea798c24c1a9b732c21daba2089\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221bc19ea798c24c1a9b732c21daba2089\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E One of the rules of the Committee is that members cannot put the same question twice. The amendment that was put forward by Lynne Pillay with regard to that name change was absolutely identical to that which was put forward by Darien Fenton and put to the vote. The normal practice is that it is the first version that is put forward and voted on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022f714d53766b246b8be818059b33044ea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f714d53766b246b8be818059b33044ea\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The difference between the two amendments is that one was for an Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation name for the principal Act, and the other one was for an Accident Compensation name for the principal Act. So they were two different amendments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00228f43af6224374caba9c6444510e35357\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228f43af6224374caba9c6444510e35357\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I have sought advice, gone upstairs to the \u201CTMO\u201D, and asked them to look at it. The Hon Dr Nick Smith is correct, and Lynne Pillay\u2019s amendment is substantially the same as the one before that was allowed. Normally it would have been ruled out as having been voted on, but there is a minor but sufficient difference between them. The Clerk has now considered the advice, and the amendment in the name of Lynne Pillay to omit all the words after \u201Csubstitute\u201D and to insert \u201CAccident Compensation (Rebalancing Between Non-Work and Work Accounts)\u201D will be put. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002296b59e23e48845b5aff411c591c4f37c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002296b59e23e48845b5aff411c591c4f37c\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Thank you for your ruling. There is just one point that I would like to draw to your attention. Although you are again attempting to inject a sense of humour into the Committee, we should make it clear that the judgments that have been made in this case are your judgments, Mr Chairperson, and not the Clerk\u2019s judgments. It is important to keep that clear, even though there is whispering into your earpiece.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002260abe7274bf348d5a31a965d420033e4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002260abe7274bf348d5a31a965d420033e4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has made the point. Of course, the member knows that in the end the decisions are the Chair\u2019s decisions, but, as the member also well knows, the Chair and the Speaker consult with the Clerk regularly and take the Clerk\u2019s advice, which I have done on this particular occasion. We now come to the amendment in the name of Lynne Pillay that I have reinstated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lynne Pillay to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CAccident Compensation Amendment Act 2010\u201D and substitute \u201CAccident Compensation (Rebalancing Between Non-Work and Work Accounts) Amendment Act 2010\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225944da3cd9184b40bd6ad14fc01b2a69\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000615\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lynne Pillay to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000616\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CAccident Compensation Amendment Act 2010\u201D and substitute \u201CRevised Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act 2010\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225719ae1fd6d8445fba30bd2df18c5be7\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000617\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lynne Pillay to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000618\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CAccident Compensation Amendment Act 2010\u201D and substitute \u201CAccident Compensation (Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation) Amendment Act 2010\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226373c728f4534c23b0e18acf77652f9f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000619\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lynne Pillay to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000620\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CAccident Compensation Amendment Act 2010\u201D and substitute \u201CAccident Compensation (Urgent Changes) Amendment Act 2010\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00228b5cb570508a40a3a748fb99dbeefc82\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022c2c140795bee48f69febb5f044ae3acb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c2c140795bee48f69febb5f044ae3acb\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: We also have a number of amendments in the name of Carol Beaumont. These also propose to amend the Minister\u2019s proposed amendment to the title of the bill. A number of the amendments are also ruled out of order for being either a criticism or a non-objective description of the bill. I will read them out: \u201CAccident Compensation Corporation (Reduced Emphasis on Rehabilitation to Reduce Costs) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation Corporation (Primary of Cost Reduction) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation Corporation (Experience Ratings) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, Accident Compensation Corporation (Alignment with Commercial Insurance Practices) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, Accident Compensation Corporation (Alignment with Australian Practices) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, Accident Compensation Corporation (Non-Work and Work Account Cost Shifting) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, \u201CAccident Compensation Corporation (Holiday Pay Exhausted Before Compensation Paid) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, Accident Compensation Corporation (Removal of Cover For Those Who Attempt Suicide) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, Accident Compensation Corporation (Reduction of Cover For Those With Hearing Impairments) Amendment Act 2010\u201D, and \u201CAccident Compensation Corporation (Removal of Cover For Those Who Attempt Suicide, Reduction of Cover For Those With Hearing Impairments, Holiday Pay Exhausted Before Compensation Paid and Non-Work and Work Account Cost Shifting) Amendment Act 2010\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Carol Beaumont to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 1 be agreed to:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CAccident Compensation Amendment Act 2010\u201D and substitute \u201CAccident Compensation Corporation (Rebalancing Between Non-Work and Work Accounts) Amendment Act 2010.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002206eaca8494ef4bb684c70fb41361fab0\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022489cbede7d434954a861d929e7193e9b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: We come now to an amendment in the name of Carol Beaumont to change the name of the Act to the Accident Compensation Corporation (Urgent Changes) Amendment Act 2010. But that title is so close to one in an amendment in the name of Lynne Pillay that we have already voted on\u2014to change the name to the \u201CAccident Compensation (Urgent Changes) Amendment Act\u201D; the title is almost identical\u2014that I rule the amendment out of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022813f1fcdca1547dc9ccefcd504682788\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022813f1fcdca1547dc9ccefcd504682788\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I seek your advice about the order in which amendments are dealt with. Is this the Minister\u2019s amendment that deals with clause 1 only\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a770730e57a241b8b5ac66aff78df54e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Correct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273d27ab7af924e659a6a410f0175cb37\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: So the amendments set down for clauses 2 or 3 will be considered subsequent to these ones?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241f60a181831470f9d7d5bfe27ca12c2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Correct. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d6311b07a4146f593c49c457b04d461\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: And there is only one set of Minister\u2019s amendments, in his Supplementary Order Paper\u2014is that correct?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab83b807a77044f180490153379dbf58\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: We are dealing with the Minister\u2019s amendment relating to clause 1 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111, and not with amendments to clauses 2 or 3. OK? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226fecf752d5fe430eae198a426f28244d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002214c4d57f3eee498caf7c3ecdc590fd3f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000632\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Steve Chadwick to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000633\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (1) \u201C1 July 2010\u201D and substitute \u201C1 November 2025\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022afdda237497d425b86e2ce5531cf8892\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002208cf080054c84c95b9797779c78a91e9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002208cf080054c84c95b9797779c78a91e9\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I have taken advice, members, and the ruling will be that as the Committee has rejected the proposal to change the commencement date, all other amendments are substantially the same and inconsistent with the Committee\u2019s earlier decision, and are therefore out of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00229cee973f849a41a48b6d7bcca6533dea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229cee973f849a41a48b6d7bcca6533dea\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The Opposition views this matter quite seriously, because it is a continuation of an approach that has been taken around amendments being submitted by the Opposition. The only mechanism that Opposition parties have in order to have influence on legislation in the Committee of the whole House is by way of amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThere is a series of points to be made here. First of all, these are all individual amendments. The value of the next amendment cannot be determined by the fact that there might be several other amendments that contain dates that are different from the one in the amendment we are currently voting for. They are separate amendments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ESecondly, this is legislation about the accident compensation scheme. There is significant political debate about the timing in regard to the dates in the scheme. It has been subject to debate and to submissions during the select committee process. During that time the concept of dates becomes critical to the passage of the bill through Parliament. To rule out all the amendments that have been made simply because a decision has been made about one particular date when there are so many dates around this area I think is very unfair on the Opposition, and I do not think it is in the spirit of the ability to make amendments to legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EIt follows on from what happened previously when the Opposition put up well-thought-out amendments that were dismissed because the Government said that there might be some sort of fiscal impact on it. Those were taken out, as well. What has now been ruled from the Chair is that there will be a determination on Opposition amendments that will deny the ability of the Opposition to make amendments to legislation before Parliament. I regard that as very, very serious indeed, considering that not only is this important legislation but also from a process point of view the rights of members of Parliament to bring amendments to the legislation before the floor of the Committee is a very, very important right and the Chair is proposing to take that away on the basis that there are simply too many. I think that is the wrong way to come towards that determination, simply on the balance of other work before the Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThese amendments that have been put in and that are in order ought to be voted on by the Committee on their own merits, and the Government can vote against them. That is the choice before the Committee. But forcing the Committee into a position whereby Opposition amendments are considered only on the basis of what is going on that day, which appears to be what is happening, I think is a hugely retrograde step and it actually takes away rights from the Opposition that I regard as being quite serious. I ask you to give some serious consideration to that, Mr Chairperson, because it may be an issue that we need to seek the view of the Speaker on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u002284ad68956c8548828c108d1cf17520e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002284ad68956c8548828c108d1cf17520e1\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E The senior Opposition whip is being rather cute here. We have 1,066 amendments that would involve the Committee in many, many hours of debating. The purpose of this Parliament is to have good, robust debate. If you allow these amendments, Mr Chairperson, you are saying that the Opposition can effectively stall the parliamentary process by simply listing a forward date\u20141 day, 2 days, or 3 days\u2014and can technically table 20,000, 100,000, or 200,000 amendments, and force this Parliament to a standstill, for what is actually not a principled argument in this Parliament doing as it should, which is robustly arguing issues of concern. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EWhat it effectively will do is say that the Opposition can bring the Parliament and its work to a halt. It can make a farce of the process, and it can tie this institution, which costs of tens of thousands of dollars every hour, in meaningless votes over a whole lot of different dates, when really the principal issue is that Labour does not agree with the bill, not that it somehow wants to defer it off to 1,066 different dates when it might be implemented. We cannot allow our Parliament to be made into a farce. I think the ruling we have had from the Chair is absolutely fair and proper. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u002211091e7c10064b65ae14761743aade24\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211091e7c10064b65ae14761743aade24\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E There is a kernel of truth in one of the points made by the Minister. Of course, it is technically possible for this Parliament to be flooded, every single day it meets, with unlimited numbers of amendments by Opposition parties. That is true every single time it meets. It is within the purview of Opposition members to take points of order, if they wish, all during question time. Indeed the Minister himself made quite a feature of that during 9 years in Opposition. It was quite an art that he had perfected. All those things are possible, but the reality is that they do not happen, because Parliament operates on a series of understandings and conventions and a will to get things done 99 percent of the time. [Interruption] If the Minister wants to use his open microphone to interject, he can, but the point I make to you, Mr Chairperson, is that these things do not happen, because Parliament\u2019s business must go through, and the Opposition cooperates with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EBut what has become very clear is that the Government is trying to roll over the top of the Opposition this week, shutting down parliamentary question time, for example, so that there is no question time between now and 17 March. We have had amendments that were ruled out by way of financial veto. The Minister, who himself talked about the ability to have robust debate in this Parliament, did not take a call at any stage today in order to defend his own legislation, so we could accuse him of a breach of parliamentary protocol. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWhat I am saying is that it is very unusual for the Opposition to lodge this number of amendments, but the fact that it has happened, and the fact that there are so many, and that, of course, it involves a lot of work for a lot of people, does not undermine the fact that these are amendments that are in order and it is within the ability of Parliament for the Opposition to do this. You are being asked to take into account a far wider gamut of things than would normally be the case. For example, many times during a normal day where the Government orders of the day take precedence the Opposition puts up amendments. It could be argued that some of them have some level of fiscal impact, but we do not see the Government running around like it did at 2 o\u2019clock today, with the Leader of the House coming in and ruling out all of those amendments. In that case there were only three amendments\u2014all three very substantial amendments; in particular, the amendment of my colleague Mr Anderton who put up a new part around, for example, suicide. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThey were very sensitive and serious matters, and I think that what has been done here is for the fact that there is a feeling there is some time pressure and the Government is unhappy about the fact that things are going slower than it would have liked to see\u2014and let me assure the Committee that it is the master of its own destiny, in that particular respect; the Opposition had a reasonable deal to cooperate on all these matters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db5c47a7f59843fea6bb5f83fa18d068\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: We would have finished this by now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a393b99d987e453589b71bbe451c305c\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: One of the ironies is that this bill would be law by now if the approach that Dr Smith and Mr Brownlee had taken had not been the case. It would have passed its third reading, so there is a degree of irony in that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EBut all of that is just by the by. What is important is that amendments that are in order, that are submitted to the Clerk\u2019s Office, should be able to be voted on, on their own merits, and not be held up in wider political concerns that are not your responsibility as Chairman. Your responsibility as Chairman is to the Committee, and to make sure that the rights of the minority can be advanced here. I think the fact that this is something that happens rarely should be a message in itself to the Government, but to the Committee it is simply a case of our amendments being able to be considered by the Committee of the whole House, and I do not think that other matter should be taken into account. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022c85b4b17c97a46a3a5203d7aa2e81c33\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c85b4b17c97a46a3a5203d7aa2e81c33\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. [Interruption] Before I do so, I ask that you deal with David Bennett and Gerry Brownlee, who interjected after I was given the call on a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002227f6fd7b4bcf4a65bfdb75e274be3925\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002227f6fd7b4bcf4a65bfdb75e274be3925\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I am not going to deal with anybody. People on both sides have been guilty of making comments and interjecting on points of order. It has not yet got to a level that I have found objectionable. If the member wants complete silence on points of order, then I suggest to the member and to his own party that they set that standard for themselves and I will judge the rest of the Committee accordingly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226de0c9f0effd4009a0018500b78a8231\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: The first thing I refer you to, Mr Chairperson, is the rulings made on 7 April 2005 in regard to the Hon Dr Nick Smith and his approach at that time. It is something that I think does need to be looked at. The second point is to ask you: when the Government has a remedy\u2014[Interruption] What is happening now, Mr Chairperson? The Minister is talking into an open\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022503dac7b63474be7928901f2cc3b4fd5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will sit down. If I want to talk to the Minister and ask him a question as an aside, I can do three or four things at once. I do not need that member to tell me not to do so. Secondly, I had my finger on the microphone. It was not an open microphone. This is the second time the member has interrupted his own point of order. If the member wants to raise a point of order he should stand, make the point of order, and be terse and direct. I will listen to it attentively.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022ac06ee5f52424c6bb134771d1edd1f50\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ac06ee5f52424c6bb134771d1edd1f50\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Of course I accept that you can do more than one thing at once.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9c6b4c66ad6408385283c7761ef8e60\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member well knows that one is not allowed to refer to a ruling on a point of order that has been dealt with. The member is relitigating the issue that he raised before. I ask the member to come to his point of order and make his point of order tersely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022939038a0a11d4134bccae49b89601f87\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: There is a long-established method of dealing with changes in commencement dates for a Government that is awake, and that is for itself to move an amendment that rules the amendments out. That has been done here in the past; it was done last year and the year before by a Government faced with this situation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe fact that John Carter is not here to run things for Mr Brownlee, and that the Government was caught flat-footed, should not be an excuse for it to hide behind this approach. I am sure that the Speaker will be involved in this matter\u2014well, I am not sure, because you might see reason, but it is likely. There is a precedent in this matter. The precedent in the past has always been that the Government deals with this through the tools that it has, rather than having the amendments ruled out. It has been caught flat-footed, and it is my view that it is not your job, Mr Chairperson, to protect them for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u002214f35b8f42424b8eb206b98727a6b9ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002214f35b8f42424b8eb206b98727a6b9ba\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E That was not a point of order; it was a highly political statement and an attack on you, Mr Chairperson, and the Chair. No one would seriously believe that the series of amendments that the Labour Party has put up are the work of people who are strenuously engaged in trying to get better legislation. It is the ultimate filibuster. I think the fact that the Government is able to set aside some of the silly, defensive moves that need to be taken because of what the Opposition should do is something that New Zealanders should be proud of. They need to see the Labour Party for what it is and what it is doing right here today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe fact is that Labour members are shrugging their shoulders and saying that we will be here for ever\u2014well, that is OK\u2014and that we should have had a question time today. We should also have had select committees sitting today, if there was going to be a question time, but the Labour members do not consider them to be important, at all, unless it is something that they want to do themselves.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c8031a51a83e4b13b72423ed94357be4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is straying into the very area he accused the Opposition of straying into: being political. I have given the member as much latitude as I am going to on this matter. If the member wishes to make a point of order, he should make the point of order, be terse, and be direct to the point he is seeking to make.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d102df0b24c464098e92df856df09a0\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: My point is that I think for the good order of the Committee, if there has been, by way of a vote, an expression about the desire of the Committee to accept a particular date as being the date we work with, then it becomes utterly frivolous for the Committee to continue suggesting other dates. That is the way you have ruled, and I think it is absolutely appropriate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00221251f66a4f974565b6a394a179ecded2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221251f66a4f974565b6a394a179ecded2\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I think there are two points to be made from that. They are simple and it is easy to do so in a terse manner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe first point is that the House has not accepted a date; it has rejected a date. There has not been any acceptance whatsoever of a date by this House; there has not been a vote on that question. The second point I should make regards a reflection on you, Mr Chairperson. Saying that the Government wishes to set aside these amendments as time-wasting, as Gerry Brownlee did\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273218a34a0d049c2a9dcd8ea7e8a8f44\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: No, I didn\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a86ce7df7a44212a148eaa5ee029e7d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: That is exactly what Gerry Brownlee said: that the Government wants to set aside these amendments. This is a decision for you to make, Mr Chairperson, and for the member to imply that you are doing the work of the Government is a reflection that I think is wrong and almost obscene.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u0022811b126eaf4d4323b18c939c96565291\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022811b126eaf4d4323b18c939c96565291\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224683e97f3f104b588d2f9acd2a53d84d\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, this will be good!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a596c4f93a9149dea1097fbf9d37e214\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: We will have quiet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3b0460178c64524980f0c03d6f09fe2\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: After you, anything would be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f55d644863174784a0e4f28753209b35\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I call for order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b66ee2da2f7f4fe0af65259f313f1c9e\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: There are a number of amendments in my name, and I want to assure the Committee that they are not frivolous or time-wasting. They are serious amendments in my name, and I ask to be taken on my word as an honourable member, as we had to do for Mr Gerry Brownlee when he said he had official advice. These amendments are not time-wasting or frivolous, and I reject that implication. They are serious amendments and I ask to be taken on my word as an honourable member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00229fae9be135a040bbbf3127002fe6be3c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229fae9be135a040bbbf3127002fe6be3c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I will not suggest that anybody is dishonourable; I will not make any of those implications. I will make several points about this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EFirstly, the ruling that I have made is, I understand from the Clerk, consistent with other decisions that have been made previously. If members doubt that, then they are perfectly entitled to use the well-worn process of challenging the Chair\u2019s decision. I also come back to the point made by the Hon Darren Hughes, that this ruling somehow takes away members\u2019 rights to move amendments. That is not the case, at all. Members have the unfettered right to move amendments. Whether they are accepted by the Chair is another matter, but it does not stop members\u2019 ability to move amendments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe next point I come to is about the date and House procedure. Mr Mallard is not correct in saying that the House has made no decision about the date, at all; the House has made a decision about the date at the bill\u2019s first reading and second reading. The bill has been before the House and has been passed, including the date, on two particular occasions. A further point I make is that the bill has been before the select committee and has been through a select committee process. This bill is nothing new to the Committee. Whether or not members like it, the fact is that the material has been through the House and has been well thought through. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EAnother point I make about the date is that the amendment to change the date one day at a time would have meant that we could have had enormous numbers of amendments that do not change things particularly at all, but are substantially the same. The Committee could find itself in the position of not only just changing the date. We could go through every minute of the day saying that, instead of midnight, it was 11.59\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201cc9dcfde17476cb7060eb0b821d0af\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: They could, but they do not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022585accf5b49c4ef8ae8687117271a889\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I am not saying they do; I am saying that we could get to this point. The issue here is substantiality, in my opinion. Does it substantially change the issue or not? This sequence of amendments does not substantially change the legislation; it makes minor amendments to test it. As to the point made by Mr Mallard about the previous events, those were tactics. They were not precedents; they were tactics to change things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003ESo I think that the key part of this has been that the House has seen this legislation on two occasions before and has seen it through the select committee. The House is well familiar with it. The ultimate test will be whether the Committee accepts it, as it is going to vote shortly on the actual date. That will be the test. If the Committee rejects the date, it is over. The point is that the date is well understood. I propose, to continue with the ruling, that, having voted on one amendment to change the date, to have a succession of amendments that marginally change the dates is out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9b0d22fad8348f18a11b77d1283de55\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9b0d22fad8348f18a11b77d1283de55\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I would like to get some advice from you about the advice that you are receiving. You make the point that you could change the commencement time from midnight to 3 p.m., or something like that. All those things are technically possible. As I said before, those things do not happen, because the place operates on understandings and agreements. When things are managed in a way that prevents that from happening for whatever reason\u2014which is still beyond us\u2014those things can fall away, and the only\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228556c67497c148b2a02faca28d9d1eb4\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Shut down select committees; it\u2019s simple!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ee14cf2aac54a2db67c4b349d357a00\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022094cca838f5d4b07b216f5844fbee248\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I was helping.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255ec82a549df49e5b6c6e53607481727\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: No, the member was not helping. I ask the member to stand and apologise to the Committee for interrupting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1b2e5013faf4842b408d18324287e92\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the Committee for interrupting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212428cce450e4219974d737d2eb6190b\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: The fact is that those arrangements have not been able to be arrived at. Then, of course, all that the Opposition can rely on are the rules and the procedures that are set out in the Standing Orders. For example, it has been possible over time to get up and seek leave to table each individual Standing Order. The Leader of the House himself did that when he was shadow Leader of the House. In fact, if you look at the Hansard from Thursday, 7 April 2005, you will see Nick Smith, the Minister in the chair, seeking leave to table individual Standing Orders. So these things are not new. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EBut I am asking for your advice, Mr Chairperson, with regard to the child discipline legislation when it was a bill going through the Committee of the whole House. A member moved many hundreds of amendments around the commencement date of that particular bill. They were all accepted and were due to be voted on by the Committee, and there was a mechanism the Government used in order to move its own amendment, because it was set out separately from the way these amendments are, with their reverse date order. There was no suggestion at all that the member\u2019s amendments could not be considered simply because there were so many of them. I think that is the point we are trying to make to you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThese are items where there is precedent for the way that Parliament votes. Just because we very occasionally\u2014once last year and hopefully just once this year, but we are in February, so who knows\u2014get into a situation like this, I think it is wrong to say that the ordinary rules of parliamentary procedure cannot apply for the Opposition simply because there are so many of them and because that has led to a situation where there is some grumpiness on the other side of the Chamber. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022998ab0dcc80c48fdb92c1ad3159e78fa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022998ab0dcc80c48fdb92c1ad3159e78fa\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. It follows on from that one and is related to it. My colleague has given you the precedent for amendments of this type being accepted. I will accept that there were not as many of them, but there were a substantial number of them and they were accepted by the Chair. You have indicated to the Committee that there is precedent for things being ruled out. You indicated that you had had advice to that effect. All I would ask would be for a reference to Hansard or Speakers\u2019 Rulings for something as specific as this being ruled out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022a87138492d1e409c8bc16ff7451270dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a87138492d1e409c8bc16ff7451270dd\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I draw the member\u2019s attention to Erskine May, page 401, on restrictions on contents of amendments: \u201CVarious considerations that render amendments out of order have been described earlier. An amendment is also out of order if it is inconsistent with an amendment already agreed to, or if it is substantially the same as an amendment to the same motion which has already been negatived.\u201D I repeat: \u201Csubstantially the same as an amendment to the same motion which has already been negatived.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI would have thought that an amendment that sought to change 1 July to 1 November, which was voted down, and a second amendment to change 1 July to 31 October were substantially the same. We are talking about 24 hours. The point that is being made here is that the amendments have to be substantially different. These amendments, in my view, are not substantially different. If it was a matter on which the legislation turned dramatically, and the legislation had not been before the Committee before, and had not been to select committee, the member might have an argument. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe point I would make to members is that this legislation that been to the House before. It has been canvassed by a select committee, and the select committee report came back without any particular sense of outrage about the date. I think the matter has been well canvassed by the House before, and these amendments are not substantially different. I say to members that I am not taking any more points of order on that. I have ruled. I have ruled the points of order out, and I will proceed to put the vote. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00224819ea8b595b45dab4bb0426265fe9fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224819ea8b595b45dab4bb0426265fe9fd\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. It is a new point of order. Of course we disagree, but we accept the ruling you have made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI raise a point of order with you, for future practice, about how Oppositions can have some certainty on their amendments, and it may be something on which you will come back to us. This is a proportional representational Parliament; since 1998 the Government has been a minority Government, and there are shifting coalitions of parties around different bills, even within confidence and supply agreements. It has become a feature of our system that minority Governments can regularly be defeated on a particular bill in the House. It is not the end of the world, because they have arrangements for confidence and supply elsewhere. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ELet us say you make that ruling, because a majority of the Committee voted against, for example, the date of 31 October 2025 because there was not a majority for that\u2014and there are a lot of amendments in there. If it was the case that a majority of the Committee was in favour of, for example, 30 April 2025, a 6-month difference, which I think would be a substantial enough difference, how can the Chair or the Committee know that, if, as soon as the first vote is taken, it is assumed that there is a majority against every single amendment that has been put up by a member? In the shifting coalitions that take place around bills, it may well be that a subsequent amendment quite further through the ones that are being put up would be able to find the majority of members of Parliament down the track. You cannot possibly know that, at the point you rule out the first amendment. This is an example, but it is a broader sort of issue, which is why we would be keen for your view. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EIt seems to me that the danger we could get into is that this is quite a first-past-the-post model. It assumes that once there is a defeat on the first amendment, that is it, and there can be no other chance for Parliament to support another style of the amendment that may come down the track. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00229f362481288a4c5d8456995a8444239c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f362481288a4c5d8456995a8444239c\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think the shadow Leader of the House raises an interesting point. If I can correct him, I say that we have probably had minority Government in this country since about mid-1994. The point is, though\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c83fd1c475384d40a2dc36456096470b\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: No, 1996. New Zealand First and National\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f77c5e3037440de9fd425eb5ad89753\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: We have, if we look at our history. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002283691b70a6e8460a8fbc26fa62885bf4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I want the member to sit down. Mr Hughes has interrupted the point of order. I want him to apologise to the Committee for interrupting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ae7e14186c2463abe38f50c6a88aff3\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272cabb25d95b45989a853ddb412dfe83\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: He is a young man, and he probably does not remember back that far. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f43e5f6a1e5744ce81423ca12ee0ca6e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281651e3209c144af8b6303a4e0d597c0\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00223e3dc89fc1d744a69fffe5918f62496f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223e3dc89fc1d744a69fffe5918f62496f\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I promise not to make fun about his size if he does not make fun about my age. I can do something about my problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e8da43d162f436e828e8376d189f2e9\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just say that I am getting a little bit frustrated by this. Members are to make points of order that are about the order. I am not interested in debating the pros and cons of MMP or the sweep of history. I am confronted here by a particular point, and I am about to hold a vote. This is the only remit I have here at the moment. This point of order has to be about this matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022a94115a9d44941079a04a4fdf00b2b2a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a94115a9d44941079a04a4fdf00b2b2a\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think your decision should stand, because the argument that Mr Hughes has just advanced is that in the few seconds that might elapse between one vote being put and the other, the arrangements in the Committee could be reconfigured, such that people might consider 1 day\u2019s movement in the dates proposed to be suddenly acceptable. That is utterly preposterous. As he says himself, we have now had a long history of coalition Governments, and I do not recall any such change in the midst of a vote. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022cb9470ee866f44438cc259b0a9463405\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cb9470ee866f44438cc259b0a9463405\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. It is close to, but not exactly on, the point that my colleague Darren Hughes has raised. I think it is close enough that we do not have to start a new one. It goes to the question of what is substantially the same. I find a compelling logic in your suggestion that shifting the date by a day would not make a lot of difference. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe question I have is whether a 1-month change or a 6-month change is, in fact, something that is substantially the same. I think that is what you are being asked to rule on. With some reluctance, and I can feel some stares already from the members behind me, I can accept a ruling that indicates that a day-by-day approach is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebd2524deb8140acba556a82399e93ad\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not the ruling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d306db6bc22a45dcbf24640ddcf0f0d1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member to constrain himself. I want to hear Mr Mallard make his point of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022771f06352ef443e4b5cc885434aef819\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: The point I am making is that I can accept, given the compelling logic we have had from the Chair on the point, that a day-by-day approach is one where there might not be a lot of substance in the difference. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe question I have, though, is that if something is a month apart\u2014even a week apart, but say a month apart\u2014whether that is substantially different, and whether the Committee should be given the opportunity to rule on that. What I am inviting you to do is to amend your ruling to, probably, rule out the majority of the amendments, but to allow the Committee to vote on a sample of them, say a month or a week apart, with a ruling that that is enough of a difference for the Committee to be allowed to voice an opinion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022deb7605e12624d42812cbebcc76c57e8\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just say to the honourable member that I am certainly not going to do that. The moment I draw a line and say that it is a month or 6 weeks, I can hear another 3 hours of debate and points of order saying that I have got the snapshot wrong. I will not take any more points of order on this issue, but I will make a couple of preliminary comments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EFirstly, it would seem to me that the substantiality argument would be a judgment that would be made at the time by any future Chair. It would be made on the basis of how important the date was, in terms of the implications of the legislation. That would be driven by the debate about the issue, during the Committee stage, or during the discussion of the bill. I have heard no such debate thus far, only at this particular point in time. In respect of the substantiality argument, on some occasions it might be small numbers and on other occasions it might be big numbers but it would be determined by the debate. I will not hypothetically project into the future what substantiality would be. I think any ordinary member of the public would say that an amendment to shift the date from 30 November to 29 November is not substantial. I think the ordinary public would say that it is a minor, technical amendment. I will not entertain any more points of order on this, and we will now move to the vote. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u002215735275e7ca4a9ea47a123c70f0bf63\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215735275e7ca4a9ea47a123c70f0bf63\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003EI raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228117be0edf5e4d208aa997a178ba3cf4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: This has to be a substantial\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022206c5cd49503420b8659faf55d0c9284\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: It is a motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022020bd431f512431289f1848508602c67\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: A motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4bb867938fe429a8aeb581adba8d961\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: I move, That the Chairperson report progress to obtain the Speaker\u2019s ruling on the admissibility of amendments substantially the same as an amendment that had been negatived.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c18014bcc61c4506b3d638c79eb1f4b2\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022654b6e2a4046421694bd379672786a63\u0022\u003ESpeaker Recalled\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022d4dbf87bd846417d9e0b2a7e3f2716db\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d4dbf87bd846417d9e0b2a7e3f2716db\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, during the Committee stage we had a number of amendments in the name of Steve Chadwick to amend clause 2. These amendments seek to change the commencement date, and there is a whole sequence of them. The first amendment seeks to delete \u201C1 July 2010\u201D and insert \u201C1 November 2010\u201D. The next amendment seeks to insert \u201C31 October\u201D. We then move from 31 October to the 30th, the 29th, the 28th, the 27th\u2014a very good day in October, I might add\u2014the 26th, and we go on. We tested the Committee on the first amendment, and the Committee defeated it. I then ruled that the rest of the amendments were out of order. I ruled them out of order on the basis of Erskine May\u2019s Parliamentary Practice, page 401, which states: \u201CAn amendment is also out of order if it is inconsistent with an amendment already agreed to, or if it is substantially the same as an amendment to the same motion which has already been negatived.\u201D I ruled that the amendment to insert \u201C31 October\u201D was substantially the same as the amendment to insert \u201C1 November\u201D, as was the rest of the sequence of amendments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe Opposition has claimed that in doing this I am stopping its right to move amendments. I do not think I am, at all. Opposition members are still free to move their amendments. I think the ruling I have made is consistent with previous Speakers\u2019 rulings. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe other matter raised by the Hon Trevor Mallard is that, in actual fact, the House has not had the opportunity to test the dates. My response to him was that the House has already seen this legislation at its first reading. It has been to the select committee, which has also considered the matter of the date. The bill has come back for its second reading, and the House has passed it on all three occasions. In doing so, the House has determined that the legislation in general, including the date, is suitable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EIn my opinion, the Committee has the ability to consider these amendments, and I would have thought that if a member had an amendment to make to the date, there would be quite a substantial amount of discussion on it during the rest of the Committee stage, because points in parts of the legislation turned on this. I did not hear that. I would have thought that if there is to be an amendment to the date, there would be a range of arguments that said that changing the date was substantially important, because of these reasons. I did not hear that. I felt that the Committee was being tested piece by piece, and that there was no substantial difference between one amendment and the next one. I have accordingly ruled out the amendment. I may wish to come back to you with some other comments later, but that is the essence of the situation as I understand it. I am sure you will hear from both Opposition and Government members as to their views on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u002254989ae564ba468d9c62d84477172373\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002254989ae564ba468d9c62d84477172373\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you for returning to rule on this matter. It is an area of incredible disappointment to the Opposition in respect of the treatment of Opposition amendments to this legislation. It falls into two areas, but it is based on the idea that the only ability that an Opposition has to rely on, through our Standing Orders and Speakers\u2019 rulings, is the ability to make speeches in opposition to legislation, or to propose amendments to offer alternatives to the Committee or to the House\u2014in this case, to the Committee\u2014in respect of legislation before it. Taken to their extraordinary extent, this could see the Parliament ground to a halt, as both the Chairman and the Leader of the House have said while we were debating this issue previously. But that does not happen, because although the rules might allow for an enormous amount of material to come by way of amendments, points of order, or seeking leave to table documents, for example, those things do not happen because there is a relationship between the Government and the Opposition that allows the smooth passage of legislation, within reason. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EOccasionally, that relationship does not exist and the Opposition has to use what is available to it in order to make its point. For example, if there is an inability to ask Ministers questions at question time, the Opposition has to use its only tools, which are protected in its Speakers\u2019 rulings and the Standing Orders, and for which you have a responsibility as the protector of the minority in your position as Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI know that you commented at the end of last year about the number of amendments on a particular piece of legislation, but that was within the context of bills never having been seen before by the Opposition, the extended use of urgency, and things that impacted from a wide variety of angles on the proceedings and good management of the House, either by actions from the Government or actions from the Opposition. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThere are two points. The first is the issue of the use by the Government of the Standing Order for fiscal aggregates. There was a discussion earlier, and I want to briefly bring you up to date with that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad277bc915074c879d71a8acb5842d35\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I urge the member to stay focused. I have not yet actually heard the particular point of order that I have been recalled to rule on, and fiscal aggregates is not the matter that, I understand, is currently the procedure that has been delaying the Committee. I urge the member to focus on the issue of order that he wishes me to rule on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226219467cd2de424086e8ed99539d583d\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am sorry. That will be a matter about amendments that we do quite genuinely wish to take up with you. But let me come to the matter for which you have been recalled. It is the ruling out of amendments that of themselves are in order that have been submitted by members\u2014in this case by the Hon Steve Chadwick and Moana Mackey. After the first vote on the first amendment, the Chairman then moved to rule out all subsequent amendments. There is an argument about whether they are substantially different; I know Mr Mallard has a view about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EBut the reason I wanted you to be recalled is that it is our view that amendments must stand on their own merits and that if there is the ability for an Opposition to put forward an amendment, that amendment itself should be judged, regardless of what other environmental factors are going on that day with regard to how many amendments there are. An amendment must be considered by the Committee, regardless of how many other amendments there are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI can give you a very recent example of that, from 13 March 2007, on the child discipline legislation. There were amendments to change the commencement date of that bill once it had received its third reading and its Royal assent, which would change the date on which it would become law. There were many, many amendments that shifted out by a number of months the date when that legislation would come into force. All of those amendments were accepted by the Clerk\u2019s Office and were put to the House. It is all available in the Journals of the House. The only time when that was interrupted was when the Government chose to support one of the amendments, in order for the other ones to become inconsequential because a decision had been made by the Committee. The Committee of the whole House has faced exactly this sort of situation before, and it has upheld the process of its rules to allow the Opposition to be able to take those amendments through. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EOur argument is that, if these amendments are simply wiped out because they are considered to be similar, then that takes away a right of the Opposition to signal its disagreement with legislation. But also, in the position where the Government is a minority Government, the Chair cannot possibly know whether, further down the list of amendments, there is a majority for a different date. I guess that is where Mr Mallard will comment on the substantially different argument, because in these amendments there are differences that are spread over many years. It may well be that in the position where the Government is in a minority, as it has been since 1998, there will be a time when one of the amendments might be successful. It seems wrong to me to rule one out, or to rule them all out, on the basis that the first one happened not to be accepted by the Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI will end by reiterating what I said at the beginning, that an Opposition has very few protections in the Chamber, and to ride over the top of those because on a particular day it happens to be inconvenient due to the amount of work, by way of the number of amendments that has been put forward, is quite wrong. This is not something that happens regularly in our Parliament. There is a self-correcting mechanism to the whole thing, and I think that it would be wrong to take away the last protections that an Opposition has when we are in the Committee of the whole House in a minority sense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u002214e0725ea5734897b02ad86d77538261\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002214e0725ea5734897b02ad86d77538261\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the next member, I urge members, in making points of order, to keep them terse. These are not speeches. I realise that members are covering issues that are interesting territory, but I would ask members to keep their point of order brief.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022a271e3bd0f1d40979ced26c3b398a271\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a271e3bd0f1d40979ced26c3b398a271\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E My colleague has outlined the issue very broadly, Mr Speaker, and I would prefer to make just a couple of very specific points. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere are three points that I want to make. Erskine May is quite clear. If there were a lack of precedent in New Zealand, that would be the fall-back position, but there is some precedent for this sort of amendment being accepted. My colleague has referred to one instance, and I think that if you cast your mind back, you would remember that this procedure has been used in the past. Generally, it has been negated by the Government; the Government has moved, in the way that it can in the Committee, to shift the day, sometimes by only 1 day. In that way, it means that none of the further amendments can be considered. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI disagree with the Chairman\u2019s suggestion that amendments can be made at the first and second readings in this House. This House, as a full House, has not had the opportunity to look specifically at that question. This is the time for any amendment to be made. The Chairman is quite right that the select committee could have considered it, and possibly, if the House was of the mind to, then the House could have sent it back to the committee after the report back in order for the date to be reconsidered. But this is the first time that this matter has been specifically addressed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EMy point, essentially, is that Erskine May is a fall-back position that I can accept. My view differs somewhat from that of my colleague in that I think that amendments shifting a date day by day are amendments that are substantially the same. But where there are big gaps between the start and the end point and a wide range of options, my suggestion is that the proper thing to do would be to rule many of the amendments out\u2014I could even say most of them, or three-quarters of them\u2014but there is enough difference between some of these amendments, if we accept the \u201Csubstantially the same\u201D argument, for a range of them to be put to the Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI know that the ruling being given here is one that will, no doubt, appear in a green book in the future, one way or the other, because we are into unprecedented territory, and it is my view that in doing so, the Speaker should make a ruling that protects the very few rights that the minority has, as long as the minority is not being totally unreasonable. I can accept that putting all of these amendments to the Committee would be totally unreasonable, but that does not mean that all of them should be ruled out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u002239a625329a464440973c0962f72e0e41\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239a625329a464440973c0962f72e0e41\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E Mr Speaker, I think that in the opening remarks made to you by the shadow Leader of the House on this issue, there was a little bit of a betrayal about why we find ourselves in these positions, and I say this only because those remarks went unchecked for quite a long time. The reality is that I understand his disappointment, but there we are: we are in this situation. I want to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c5c2fb7771b45599ca64aa25e822bc4\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I just urge the honourable member, please\u2014the contributions have been of good quality, and I do not want to see a deterioration of this procedural discussion under points of order. It is an important procedural issue, and I ask the member to respect that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f83c71d39cd41d9b678d8961c96888e\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: It is indeed a very important procedural issue, but I would ask that you check the Hansard just to assure yourself as to that quality in relation to the opening statement from the shadow Leader of the House. I think that two Speakers\u2019 rulings are relevant here. As well as the conclusion reached by Chairman Rick Barker this afternoon, which I strongly support, there are two Speakers\u2019 rulings, 112/6 and 113/1, that are also relevant. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe first one goes to the issue of relevancy. The most important point there is 112/6(4). The issue has been ruled on by Speakers continually over a long period. I note that obviously there was a problem with this sort of thing in the late 1800s and early 1900s, but the point remains that if an amendment is in conflict with the provisions of the bill, then it is not relevant. Further, coming to Speaker\u2019s ruling 113/1, that ruling states: \u201CA bill can be amended only in ways that are relevant to the text. It cannot be turned into something that it is not, and did not start out as.\u201D The text reference in that ruling is most important, because we are repeatedly reminded in this House that there are occasions when the courts will turn to Hansard debates, select committee reports, and a range of commentary on the passage of legislation through this House for some guidance as to how it should be read. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI would suggest that it has been abundantly clear for a very long time that this legislation is to commence on 1 July 2010 and to have its effect from that point. We know that there is a need to have some provisions in this bill dealt with by 1 April as well, so that the people dealing with it have a fair and reasonable amount of time before that. To accept a series of amendments that of themselves do not substantially change the initial intention of the preceding amendment, and to let that run out for some thousand amendments\u2014or, in other words, nearly 3 years\u2019 worth of date changes\u2014I think contravenes the idea that it is not turning the bill into something that it did not start out as. I think that it is also in conflict with the provisions and the purpose of the bill in the first place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EAs to the issue of there being no certainty about the voting support for any one amendment or another, that would be assuming that in the few intervening seconds between a vote being put for one date and a vote being put for the next, an entire Government coalition could deconstruct and there could be some sudden change that no one in the Chamber knew about. I think that is an implausible position, and it is an argument that cannot be run too strongly. But on those other two longstanding Speaker\u2019s rulings, I think that the conclusion reached by Chairman Barker today is the correct one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221fb49bfa437b45bdbe52905840dfe04b\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I will accept the Hon Dr Nick Smith, as long as he is brief. Interesting issues have been raised and I am ready to rule on the matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u0022be09e99712ef4bcc91e7f02c62928f6e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be09e99712ef4bcc91e7f02c62928f6e\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E As the Minister in the chair, I want to make a brief point. In the sense of the relevance of Parliament, I would suggest that this is a bit of a try-on. We have 1,066 amendments tabled, most of which shift the commencement date by 1 day. If the House were to allow every one of those amendments to be put, it would take 15 or 16 hours of the time of the 122 members of this House, a House that costs over $15,000 an hour to run, being spent not on debate. New Zealanders expect issues to be robustly debated in the House, and I welcome that. But as a pragmatic speaker who has been interested in the quality of this institution of Parliament, serving the interest of the public at large, I ask whether that interest is best served by spending 15 hours on amendments that would vary the commencement date by 1 day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe second point I make is in response to those that have been made by Mr Mallard, who said that what the Government needs to do is move the very first amendment to change the date from the date that is in the bill, and that way, if that is agreed to, then the procedure is quite OK. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EMy response to that is if that is to be the procedure of the House, then that says to Ministers that they should introduce a bill to the House without its intended commencement date, then bring it in, confusing the public and everybody, and then, when we get to the Committee stage, move an amendment to shift it. In terms of the public purpose of this Parliament for the people of New Zealand, I ask how that procedural approach would help the relevance of this Parliament. We would get people submitting on a bill that does not have the date that was intended because we Ministers were forced into a position of cute amendments during the Committee stage to overrule what is nothing more than a sophisticated mechanism that is being attempted to create a filibuster of voting. That is why, Mr Speaker, my plea to you is to support the Chair and for common sense to prevail.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u00221ac3f7e4fd05413d8657fead946e475b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221ac3f7e4fd05413d8657fead946e475b\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank honourable members for a very interesting procedural discussion under point of order. I agree with the Hon Trevor Mallard that we are in territory without clear precedent in New Zealand\u2019s parliamentary practice; therefore, it is important. That is why I have listened very carefully to the points being made. I think very good points have been made by both sides in the last few minutes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI assure the Hon Darren Hughes that my thinking in this is certainly not governed by the number of amendments in itself. There could be any number of amendments that are different from each other to a piece of legislation. Opposition members, or any member, have the absolute right to put amendments that the Committee has not already decided upon. That is not the crucial issue. There are more substantive issues involved in this particular ruling that I am about to make. I think the crux of the whole thing comes down to the issue, which was recognised by the Hon Trevor Mallard, that, if we look at what has been the practice in New Zealand in the past, as was mentioned by the Hon Dr Nick Smith, we see that when the Government\u2014usually it is the Government\u2014moves an amendment to a date and the Committee votes on that, once that is accepted then any other amendments are ruled out. We have had that as a clear precedent in New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EWhat has not been such a clear precedent in New Zealand, and this is an issue that I am going to rule on at this stage and suggest a way forward for, is the other side of that mention in Erskine May, which the Chair, the Hon Rick Barker, has emphasised, and that is that Erskine May also emphasises that a Chairperson has to also consider the admissibility of amendments that are substantially the same as an amendment that has already been negatived by the Committee. That is something that has not been our common practice in New Zealand, I think it is fair to say. Yet what the Hon Dr Nick Smith pointed out in his point of order is that in the past, our not having accepted that practice has led to a fairly unsatisfactory situation whereby it may lead to the Government doing exactly what the member suggested, which is leaving out a date so that an amendment can be moved by the Government to put a date in and any other dates are then ruled out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI think the Hon Trevor Mallard has made an interesting point in accepting the basis of Erskine May\u2019s advice on page 401. The Hon Trevor Mallard pointed out that the issue is what is considered to be substantially different, and he pointed out that when it comes to dates, 6 months\u2019 difference is substantial compared with a difference of 1 or 2 days. I make it very clear to members that I will rule in favour of the Chair\u2019s position on this. The Chair has found that the amendments are not admissible because the Committee has already negatived an amendment that is substantially the same as those other amendments. Therefore, the Chair, the Hon Rick Barker, has ruled them out, and I will support that ruling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIn doing so, I suggest to members that this matter be looked at further by the Standing Orders Committee. I think that what is different in our practice from the practice at Westminster is that at Westminster the Chair can select, from a range of dates, two or three amendments that are substantially different, and test them. Once they are tested, the rest are out. It may be that we should look at something similar. In our procedures in this Parliament, we do not have the ability for the Chair to choose, from a lot of amendments that are very, very similar, some that could be considered to be different. I think it is something I would like to have the Standing Orders Committee look at for the future. As Speaker I am genuinely concerned in the interests of the minority, and that would overcome any concerns about the Chair deciding what might be substantially different, because then the Committee would have decided that, in the matter of two or three amendments that could be voted on in a reasonable space of time, and that would then resolve that matter so that the Chair is not having to make that judgment totally on his or her own. That is what I want the Standing Orders Committee look at. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EBut at the moment I am ruling in favour of the position adopted by the Chair of the Committee, which is that because the Committee has already negatived an amendment that is substantially the same as these further amendments, they are ruled out. I thank all the members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00222b15073f795c4578b3f8982b0e6be3df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b15073f795c4578b3f8982b0e6be3df\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I speak not in any way to litigate your ruling; it is in one that I think we will consider carefully, and I hope the Standing Orders Committee does as well. I seek leave for there to be a question time at 2 p.m. tomorrow, 25 February on outside time, with the normal arrangements for the lodging of questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc89aaf4cf4b441e9ff69eea5c1cf341\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022bc985fc2ddbf40ee8b30b79fcd499e6f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bc985fc2ddbf40ee8b30b79fcd499e6f\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I did not hear objection. I saw a nod, but did not hear a word.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022886ab972d5984d74a0da6d41ade435a6\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: There is a concern about whether I correctly ruled on the matter. I am very happy to put the leave again. Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00223534e10b38d246a88e1d0236161f6522\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223534e10b38d246a88e1d0236161f6522\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I want to make it very clear that we are always open to negotiate these matters with the Opposition, when it behaves\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d9e162a75a94d3898cc5ca9887539f1\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260af642aee104fbe81c032441bbc0b00\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: That was just playing politics.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d2ba8e15e844b52a5a7a6d29737ef2c\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am on my feet and that was not a point of order. The member is perfectly at liberty to negotiate with whomever he wishes, but that was not a point of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI declare the House back in Committee in consideration of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227809663e696f45c8bdb8e74b9c865f4e\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000768\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b9d6ab33bab546b69da92727d2b17c10\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3 (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000770\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Moana Mackey to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000771\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (2) \u201Con the day after the date on which this Act receives the Royal assent\u201D and substitute \u201C1 November 2027\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022bf1bc93280bf4403b187a80c0f0dfa36\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022f6aab5f5c9c140049b8aaf41ea9a84e7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f6aab5f5c9c140049b8aaf41ea9a84e7\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I am now confronted with exactly the same decision as I was before. I am mindful that the Speaker has supported my previous ruling, which was to rule these amendments out because they are substantially the same as the amendment the Committee has already negated. I am of a mind to test the Committee\u2019s opinion. I have two conundrums here. One is that the Speaker has said that the matter will be referred to the Standing Orders Committee, so as to give the Chair discretion. I will stick with that decision because I think the Standing Orders Committee needs to make a decision about the ambit of the Chair\u2019s discretion in this. As I see the matter at the moment, I have full discretion. However, I make the observation that the practice in other places was for the most radical amendment to be taken first and the least radical after that, and if both are negated, then all in between go. I have taken from Moana Mackey\u2019s amendments the least radical, which is to amend the date to 2007, and the most radical, which is to amend the date to 2015. I will now put the latter amendment. If the Committee negates both, I will rule out all subsequent amendments in between those dates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022b28961ca30304a28bb39483972e955f8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b28961ca30304a28bb39483972e955f8\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. That sounds like an excellent suggestion. Just to clarify, you referred to the least radical amendment as being 2007 and the most radical as being 2015. I think you meant the reverse way round: that the least radical would be 2015 and the most radical would be 2027\u2014just so we are clear about what we are voting on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242a30a16ceab4f54a69a38f54019d09f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. The House has negated the most radical, 1 November 2027, and the least radical is 10 August 2015.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Moana Mackey to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (2) \u201Con the day after the date on which this Act receives the Royal assent\u201D and substitute \u201C10 August 2015\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002249ddfd65ce3c40928fd34c96f35271c7\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221861b9ad754e463399a986c2d91e7b72\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I rule all the other amendments in the name of Moana Mackey out of order, as they are substantially the same. Next is an amendment in the name of the Hon Steve Chadwick. All her amendments relate to the year 2025. I will put one amendment to test the opinion of the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Steve Chadwick to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (2) \u201Con the day after the date on which this Act receives the Royal assent\u201D and substitute \u201C1 November 2025\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c0a6ad34c4884980b8fbe8e8d510c44d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265d3cca2698f443593fb6679668ec945\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I rule that all the subsequent amendments in the name of the Hon Steve Chadwick are out of order because they are substantially the same as the amendments that have already been disposed of by the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022666bcc374324477fa75fb62907dec8a3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022188f18be9cb34c2aa0efcf425eefdcf8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022188f18be9cb34c2aa0efcf425eefdcf8\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: There are amendments to clause 2 in the name of the Hon Steve Chadwick to insert a new clause 2A. There are 1,066 of these amendments, and I rule all of them out of order because they are not consistent with the Standing Order that defines a preliminary clause as a commencement clause and, if applicable, a principal clause in the Act. These amendments propose an expiration clause and should have been in the body of the legislation. They are ruled out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229d47817a1fd24bfaaee5a2994ec4ffd3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002235e4c463e3aa458983ed9acf91975178\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 3 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000783\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000784\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b838de14afac4afab453bef9c8c8a322\u0022\u003EAccident Compensation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002240a7b4e610334563a37084d11ac17fff\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00225340a8e781c943849fc6d609642cb0b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225340a8e781c943849fc6d609642cb0b7\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill be now read a third time. This bill comes down to something very simple: what scale of increases in levies can New Zealanders afford? This bill halves the scale of the increases in accident compensation levies that would be required of motorists, workers, and businesses. The most extraordinary part of the Committee stage debate on this bill was that there were over 100 contributions from members of the Opposition but not once did they mention the issue of levies for ordinary New Zealanders, for motorists, and for businesses. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI ask a simple question. Can New Zealanders afford an extra $74 per car for their car registration? I say to people who do not support this bill that that is the scale of increase required under the existing Act for the motor vehicle account. Can New Zealanders right now afford an additional $300 a year in terms of the earners levy for a person on the average wage? Members on this side of the House say no, they cannot. Members on the opposite side of the House want to impose that additional cost on to the normal house owner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe third question I ask\u2014because I hear so many speeches about jobs today\u2014is whether the businesses of New Zealand can afford a 25 percent increase in their accident compensation levies on 1 April. Members on this side of the House say no, they cannot. Members on the opposite side of the House seem ignorant of the sorts of pressure that businesses are under and the sorts of costs that would be imposed on them if we did not proceed with this amendment bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EYou see, members opposite are in a state of denial. It is a statement of fact that Maryan Street, the previous Minister for ACC, signed off on a $2.4 billion loss in the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) in June 2008. But it is worse than that. After declaring a $2.4 billion loss, in a cynical political exercise members opposite then extended the accident compensation scheme in an additional dozen areas without providing any funding. That is what members opposite did, and despite repeated challenges from National members to provide some explanation for that reckless and irresponsible act, we have not heard a single member respond to that challenge. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe reality is\u2014and no member opposite has denied these facts\u2014that the cost of accident compensation claims over the last 4 years has increased by $1.3 billion, or 57 percent. The cynical part of the Opposition members is that they get on the steps of Parliament and they protest against increases in accident compensation levies. They also participate in protests against reductions in entitlement. Well, the twain do not meet. Those members cannot have it both ways, unless they are financially illiterate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EGreen Party members have promoted a view that the accident compensation scheme should change to a \u201Cpay as you go\u201D basis. That would be fair. That argument is a credible argument, and I will be happy to have the debate about that. But where Labour members are all over the paddock is that in one breath they use figures for a \u201Cpay as you go\u201D basis but in the next breath they say they want to have a fully funded scheme, and despite repeated challenges as to whether Labour policy is for a fully funded scheme or a \u201Cpay as you go\u201D scheme, they will not answer. They do not know. Frankly, if they cannot answer such fundamental questions about our accident compensation scheme, they are unfit to be the Opposition, let alone the Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003ELet me go through the key changes that we are making in this bill. The first thing is to push out the full funding date from 2014 to 2019. That provision will reduce the volatility in levies and take the pressure off levy payers. Members on this side of the House simply ask whether we should push the full funding date out to 2019. We say yes; they say no. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EDuring the Committee stage I made a change to the title of the principal Act\u2014that is, I called it what I think common-sense New Zealanders would call it: the Accident Compensation Act. In an exercise in political correctness that speaks volumes about the previous administration, after 28 years of the principal Act being called the Accident Compensation Act, members opposite wanted to call the Act the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act. They believed that changing the name of the Act would somehow deal with the important issues of injury prevention and rehabilitation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe irony is that after changing the name of the Act, in each and every year rehabilitation rates got worse and injury prevention actually did not work because injury rates continued to increase. I make no apologies for saying we should forget political correctness and call the Act what common-sense New Zealanders would call it\u2014the Accident Compensation Act. However, I wish to make plain to the House, just as I did when I launched the programme of injury prevention in homes, that injury prevention is an important area of focus. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EOne of the areas in which the differences between the Government and the Opposition are so clear is in the area of criminal disentitlement. Members on this side of the House say that the accident compensation scheme is not for the purpose of providing compensation for those who commit crimes. In the debate I had with Mr Parker about Mr Graeme Burton, Mr Parker vigorously argued that Burton should, as a matter of basic human rights, receive support from ACC. Members on this side of the House have no sympathy for Graeme Burton and make no apologies for the changes in this bill that disentitle criminals from accident compensation when they are committing offences. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI come now to other provisions in the bill, and I want to make a point in respect of holiday pay. Members on this side of the House say that people should not be able to be better off by drawing both holiday pay and ACC income compensation at the same time. Do we live in such a generous nation? Are we so well off that people should be better off after having an accident than when they were working? Members on this side of the House say no; members on that side of the House say yes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThat is equally so with the provisions in respect of seasonal work. On this side of the House we say it is wrong that Labour changed the law in late 2008, particularly after declaring a loss of $2.4 billion, and said that seasonal workers will, under Labour\u2019s amendments, end up better off in the long term on income compensation than they would be if they were working. What sort of signal do we send to people when we say they are better off on accident compensation than they would be if they were working? That is not a signal that members of the Government want to send New Zealanders. That is why we are making that change to the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThere has been the sensitive issue of self-inflicted injuries and suicide. I remind the House that Owen Woodhouse said that that was not appropriate to be included in the scheme. Again, that was a provision that was introduced at the last moment by the previous Government. A simple common-sense policy was made by this side of the House. Suicide is a tragedy, but it is not an accident. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EIn conclusion I say that this bill is about being fair to levy payers and accident victims. It is about securing an affordable 24/7 accident compensation system for New Zealand. It is the sort of reform that, sadly, this Government needed to do because of the poor way in which the previous Government managed the scheme. This bill deserves the support of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222b7fe8e1edba48048ac06b7c48e8c1fe\u0022\u003ECommittees\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228dd27cd943014edc99709146c91dcf03\u0022\u003EBusiness of Select Committees\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d786c109518143fa96c5e0ba1e5b182f\u0022\u003EMeetings\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00222d834e198c524e1091d79df14a193a70\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222d834e198c524e1091d79df14a193a70\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E My apologies to the speaker who is about to make a contribution to the debate, but, commensurate with a Business Committee decision, I need to seek leave of the House for the Health Committee to meet outside New Zealand with its counterparts in Australia from 8 to 11 March 2010 as part of the annual joint committee exchange with Australia.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf44b978425343f8828bb8d7923c6605\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is anyone opposed to that course of action? It appears not. Leave is granted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ccfc07d8af964b56a932c04ae8430274\u0022\u003EAccident Compensation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022005e621032da456dbf433acff8e7d70f\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000809\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u00228215bb8cc6ce4adbaf25ad08a08c2735\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228215bb8cc6ce4adbaf25ad08a08c2735\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will begin by refuting some of the assertions that the Minister for ACC, Dr Smith, made, knowing them to be wrong. The first is his claim that the current Labour Opposition opposes the date for the extension to full funding. He knows that his statement to that effect in his speech a minute ago is totally incorrect. He knows that it was Labour Party policy at the election to extend the date for full funding. He knows that I have had a member\u2019s bill in the ballot all of this year that could have made this happen a year ago. He knows that in the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee report on the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill we said in our minority report: \u201CWe support the extension of the date for full funding of historic claims, but oppose the bill overall.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EWhat Dr Smith said in his speech was the opposite of what I have just said. Listeners to this debate can judge for themselves as to whether there was a fair representation of the Labour Party position by Dr Smith. It clearly was not. We know that most of the levy reductions saved by this bill, the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill, are of a consequence of extending the date for the full funding of those historic claims that have not yet been fully funded. Yes, this party still stands for full funding. We agree with the extension of the date for full funding. We know, and the Minister knows, that that is the most substantial cause of the levy reductions occasioned by this bill. He likes to hide from that reality. That is the reason that he has not extended the date for full funding until now. He tries to use the levy reductions that are occasioned by extending the date for full funding of the tail as an excuse to cut other parts of the scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EWhich are the other parts of the scheme that Dr Smith is cutting? Well, they are real cuts. They will hurt people. They will hurt people who have had accidents at work, especially. At present someone can be put off accident compensation cover. When that happens the person\u2019s earnings-related compensation comes to an end, and rehabilitation treatment, physiotherapy, orthopaedic interventions, etc. come to an end, after he or she is deemed to be ready to return to the workforce. Currently people can be deemed to be ready to come back to the workforce only if they are well enough to work for 35 hours a week. Most people need to work for 35 hours a week in order to keep the wolf from the door. This bill changes that. It says that people can be pushed off accident compensation when they are capable of working for 30 hours per week. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThat works in concert with another change to the rules, which says the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) will no longer have to have regard to pre-accident earnings. The combined effect of those changes is that someone\u2019s income could halve after he or she comes off accident compensation. Someone can be put off the scheme when he or she is capable of working for only 30 hours a week and that person can be put into a job where he or she is earning the minimum wage. We had the example, which I think is quite a moderate example, of a moderately paid person in the banking industry who gets a computer overuse injury. He or she can be off work for a substantial period of time, so the employer needs to have someone else in that position. The contract of employment is frustrated, through no fault of the employer or the employee. That person loses his or her job and goes on to accident compensation. Now that person can be forced off cover when he or she is in a position to work as a stacker in a supermarket, working for the minimum wage. That person could be working for 30 hours on the minimum wage as a shelf stacker, and his or her income could halve when compared with that in his or her prior occupation as a bank teller. That is what this bill does. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EWe are told that this legislation is necessary in the name of the affordability of the scheme. That is nonsense; that is wrong. The Government did not present any information regarding the relative costs of this scheme compared with similar costs in Australia until the Opposition, as is its right, asked the officials to prepare some information comparing the costs to employers of New Zealand accident compensation with costs in the Australian schemes. I had thought that information would be prepared by the Government or for the Government by departments, but, no, we did not have it. I had thought that submitters that came from business organisations that were multinationals, or their representative organisations, which have access to that information from multinationals operating in jurisdictions like Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, would provide that information to us. But, no, we did not have any information on that from those submitters, despite requests from the Opposition that they provide it. The only information we got was that which the Opposition requested from the officials. When it came, it showed that levies for employers in Australia for employee risks are significantly higher than in New Zealand, sometimes twice as high. On average, they are 50 percent higher than those levies are in New Zealand. There is no justification on that basis for making accident compensation provisions more miserable for New Zealand workers than they currently are. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003ELet us not pretend that accident compensation is great now. Being deemed fit for work does not mean to say someone gets a new job. Already more than 50 percent of the long-term claimants that go off cover are not in full-time work. A significant proportion of them languish on the dole queue at a cost to the State, rather than to their former employer through accident compensation levies. Already a significant proportion are without any income, probably because they cannot get a job and their husband or wife is employed. Already a significant proportion are in only part-time work. The majority of people do not get back to full-time work for a very, very long time. So the Government should not give us the affordability line, because the only information we had is that accident compensation remains cheaper here than it is in Australia. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThe Minister talked about accident rates and said that we have not done any work on accident prevention in New Zealand. That is rubbish. The previous Government improved the performance of the Department of Labour in terms of workplace inspections and maintaining safety standards. That did see an improvement in safety records in New Zealand. That was necessary because it is fair to say before then the trend was wrong. It is also true to say the work that was done on road safety, including improvements through better highways, better safety standards for new vehicles, educational programmes, and drink-driving enforcement, etc. saw a drop in accident rates per 100 kilometres driven\u2014I think that is right, is it not, Annette? [Interruption] Yes, it is true that total accidents may have increased, but during that 10-year period a lot more kilometres were driven, because of the higher population, which was driving further because the economy, at least under us, had improved. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThere is no doubt that this legislation makes the accident compensation system worse. In my opinion, some of the egregious changes will be taken advantage of following the privatisation of parts of the scheme. One would have to be naive to think that a private insurer will want to contribute to accident prevention work in the same way that can be achieved through a State-owned monopoly. One would have to be naive to think that one would not use the right to push people off cover once they were deemed to be work-ready for 30 hours\u2019 work a week, if one did not have to have regard to their pre-accident earnings. One would have to be naive to think that an insurance company that has the right to push someone into a lower-paid job will not do so. The insurance companies will do so; they will act as they do in other spheres of insurance. The companies will do what is permissible within the letter of the law and within the letter of the policy, to the extent that they can, in order to minimise their costs. These changes, together with looming privatisation, which is the price that the ACT Party has exacted for its support of this legislation, mean that New Zealand workers will once again be worse off as a consequence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003ETime and time again we have heard from this National-led Government that its ambition is to improve the lot of New Zealanders, especially New Zealand workers, in order to approach the position that Australian workers are in. Yet in this area, despite the facts that in New Zealand levies are cheaper for employers by quite a margin and that we already have a system that is the envy of Australia, we see that the lot of workers is to deteriorate. Their lot will deteriorate because the generosity of the provision that they get is to worsen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI will say something briefly about Dr Nick Smith\u2019s accusation that Labour is in favour of Graeme Burton and other criminals. That is not correct. Labour does not favour any compensation being paid to Mr Burton. He should not receive earnings-related compensation; he should not receive lump-sum compensation. He has neither of these. That issue is an absolute sideshow. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc5805e2c16e4af6a593301623146111\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: You think he deserves a $10,000 leg.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbf2e02c67fc4943b6512f79eb4dace6\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: But we have David Garrett\u2014and other people who are as inhumane as he is\u2014saying that not only should criminals lose compensation but they should not even get a prosthetic leg. That is where the Labour members disagree with those members, because we say a man without a leg should have a leg. Maybe he should not be given an expensive titanium one, but he should at least have a wooden leg to hold him up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI am quite happy to stand up and be judged for saying that, because I think that that is fair and most New Zealanders agree with me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299e965f7d6304d4b8ecec2dd6065610e\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not what you said last night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf14caae8a6f472b936d969d7effea45\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Mr Garrett that that is exactly what he said, and I tell him that he should reflect on the inhumanity of his position. That is not to deny that Graeme Burton is a bad and terrible person. But the whole issue regarding him is a sideshow created by the National Party to deflect attention away from the reality that with no justification, this legislation decreases the compensation and rehabilitation services that are needed by New Zealanders when they are injured. They gave up their rights to sue in exchange for receiving those services, and they are substantially losing them through this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227d679cbdc9c24d7e887ad6a888f8aead\u0022\u003EMaiden Statements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f332c1de4452467798b2d435247d831b\u0022\u003EMaiden Statements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022 data-id=\u002252691b2ef587497a94dccf6d372ba83f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002252691b2ef587497a94dccf6d372ba83f\u0022\u003EGARETH HUGHES (Green):\u003C/span\u003E Kia ora. I feel extremely privileged to stand here. My first words in this House will be about hope, for as a Green Party member what motivates me is hope for a fairer and more prosperous future. As a father I am hopeful for a safer world for my son to inherit, and as a young person I am hopeful for a New Zealand that I can continue to be proud of. This evening I will introduce myself and use my personal story to illustrate why I am passionate about Green politics and optimistic about the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EAs the youngest member in this House I represent a generational shift both in this Parliament and in the Green Party caucus. I was born in 1981 in a very different New Zealand. Twenty-eight years ago we had 3 million people and 7 million sheep. New Zealanders needed to get a doctor\u2019s prescription to buy margarine, and we had a very different National Prime Minister\u2014one who was thinking big, if also a little sloppily. Like the rest of New Zealand, in 1981 my home town was split by conflict over the racist Springbok Tour. It was also in 1981 that the honourable Leader of the Opposition entered this House. Like other people of my generation, I do not remember the 1984 general election, which ushered in so much change. That revolutionary transformation of the political and social consensus in New Zealand was on a par with the Liberal, Vogel, and first Labour Government reforms, which were such historic milestones. That year was a long, long time ago. In 2010 I am hopeful we are on the cusp of another change\u2014another revolutionary transformation. I am looking forward to the opportunity to work with the Green Party and this Parliament to shift us from a dirty, unfair, old-fashioned economic model to an innovative, sustainable, and fair economy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EI grew up in Gisborne more boy racer than bohemian. I loved cars, wanted to be an All Black, and remember laughing at my recently turned vegetarian friend, saying he was just a poser and that I would never be vegetarian. Although environmental issues were not top of the agenda at home, at school, or in the media, I was acutely aware at the time of social issues like inequality and unemployment. In the late 1980s, due in part to the Rogernomic reforms, my father, along with many locals, was made redundant at the local freezing works. I worked from an early age\u2014as a pamphlet deliverer, pushing trolleys at the supermarket, and in a fish and chip store\u2014because it was necessary. It was not until I left home to study religion and history at Victoria University and to personally contribute my $30,000 to the more than $9 billion national student debt that I was exposed to the most radical political idea of the last 50 years: the Earth is not growing. Sure, it sounds simple and common-sense, but when one stops to think, one sees that our entire economic system is dependent on infinite growth on a finite planet. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EThe most serious symptom of our addiction to growth is climate change. We do not need a weatherman to say which way the wind blows, and we do not need a climatologist to say to which way the temperature goes. We need better ways of living because we do not have a planet B. To quote George Monbiot, \u201CHumanity is no longer split between conservatives and liberals, reactionaries and progressives, though both sides are informed by the older politics. Today the battle-lines are drawn between expanders and restrainers; those who believe that there should be no impediments,\u201D\u2014to growth\u2014\u201Cand those who believe that we must live within limits.\u201D From this understanding I became a passionate environmentalist. In my twenties, like so many ordinary Kiwis, I became active and I campaigned: from helping to stop genetically engineered food sneaking on to our dinner plates, through sailing on the Rainbow Warrior and directly stopping bottom trawlers from wiping out amazing undersea worlds, to most recently coordinating the Sign On campaign for Greenpeace, in which more than 200,000 Kiwis called on the Prime Minister to do the right thing for the climate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EThe 1999 election was a turning point for me. It was so exciting and empowering to see people like me talk in this House about the things I cared about. MMP meant decisions were no longer just made by white, middle-aged men in smoky back rooms. MMP helped more people to be represented in the House of Representatives, and I contend that it also helped form better decisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EI grew up in the region known as Poverty Bay, which 241 years ago had a different, more hopeful name. On 6 October 1769 Nicholas Young, the surgeon\u2019s boy on the ship Endeavour, sighted the coastline of New Zealand and also the thriving settlement of T\u016Branga-nui-a-Kiwa. We teach the discovery of New Zealand in schools, but like an embarrassing family secret we prefer to forget or to downplay that on first contact on that day Te Maro of Ng\u0101ti Oneone was killed by English musket fire and, as petty recompense, three iron nails were left on his corpse.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E History is a passion of mine and can sometimes reveal inconvenient truths. Many New Zealanders would not know that M\u0101ori had a Declaration of Independence, would not know a Treaty clause, and would not know that tino rangatiratanga\u2014sovereignty\u2014was not ceded in the Treaty but taken at the point of a musket. To take my seat in the House last week I had to pledge allegiance to the Queen. I look forward to the day when we can reform our constitution to ditch the monarchy, decentralise our political structures, and see genuine tino rangatiratanga for tangata whenua. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003ETwo years ago I became a dad, and I want my son to grow up knowing his history, eating safe food, and enjoying a stable climate and a prosperous economy. Though our politics differ, I know all members in the House want these things for all Kiwi kids. But why are Governments of both colours failing? This Government, like Labour before it, ignores the warnings of the end of cheap oil; blithely builds more motorways; chronically under-invests in public transport, walking, and cycling; and perpetuates the housing crisis that sees people of my generation forced out of affordable homeownership. As different from each other as Coke is from Pepsi, both parties ignore the crisis in the oceans, depend on debt to fuel growth, and continue to support growing inequality. In desperation the current Government is hunting for coal in the last protected places. Mining companies can already mine in 87 percent of New Zealand, and by opening up the last 13 percent the National Government is undoing its own wise decision from 1997. Mining the national parks is like burning the furniture to keep warm. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EAs a career, I have been privileged and proud to be a climate campaigner. I am passionate about working towards finding the solutions to climate change. It is one of the most fascinating issues facing humanity at the moment. In a way, it is a tragedy that it is seen just as an environmental issue. Last year former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan reported that right now 300,000 people die every year as a result of climate change. Man\u2019s massive and growing release of greenhouse gases is a people issue. It is an economic issue, a social justice issue, and a spiritual issue. It is not just about the polar bears and penguins; at issue is the future of humanity as we know it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EWith the growth in emissions\u2014especially from more cars, cows, and coal\u2014will the New Zealanders of my son\u2019s generation rightfully ask of us who are tonight in this House what we did when we had the chance? Could future leaders accuse us in this House of wilful neglect? Could Ministers be put in the dock for crimes against the planet? From Kupe to Cook to Sir Ed, we have been a can-do, forward-looking nation. As Kiwi as pavlova, Kiwis are prepared to play our part and to do the right thing. Yet when it comes to the climate crisis, a crisis bigger than Mount Everest, Governments, both Labour and National, instead of putting one foot after the other to scale the challenge, get knocked off by the bastard. They put corporate and short-term interests ahead of saving the climate. As Sir Nicholas Stern pointed out, it is expensive to tackle climate change, but it is considerably cheaper than paying the costs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EOne person in particular who epitomised the hope and realism of the Green vision was Jeanette Fitzsimons. People keep telling me that they are big shoes to fill, but I prefer to consider that I have strong shoulders to stand on. Jeanette was a pioneer, and over the last 10 years the Green Party has grown from being the fresh-faced new kid on the block to being a respected, effective, and principled party. I am now the first Green MP who has not sat in the House with either Rod or Jeanette. The Greens are growing. There are new faces, new energies, and new issues, but the same values. Surrounded by my colleagues, I know that the vision of a peaceful, democratic, greener, and fairer Aotearoa New Zealand will continue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EIt is an exciting time to enter this House. The time for bandages, step changes, and tinkering is ending; a new generation of young people is entering politics, and they are optimistic about the future and turned off by the petty parliamentary point-scoring and vacuous, visionless politics espoused by our leaders. I will work constructively on issues with any party in this House, and with any person, where we can. I am not here for the petty points or the tribal battles. I believe that my generation wants less partisan politics, and is more open to new ideas and more flexible thinking. We are too young to remember the polarising politics of Sir Rob Muldoon, Ruth Richardson, and Sir Roger Douglas. I would like to float a proposal to the other young members in this House to form an inter-party youth caucus, which would work collaboratively on the issues of youth crime, youth suicide, housing affordability, intergenerational debt, tertiary education issues, and a host of other challenges facing our young Kiwis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EWe face both economic and ecological crises. More people from a variety of backgrounds\u2014from progressive business leaders like Stephen Tindall and Geoff Ross to unions\u2014understand that the answers to one crisis can and must be the answer to both. We need a Green New Deal. The Greens have costed out a suite of proposals that, in a nutshell, would put the economy from the red into the green. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003ENext year will be my dreaded 30th. It is election year, and it is also the year in which New Zealand has the privilege of hosting the Rugby World Cup. I am a rugby fan, and I am keen to make sure the cup is a success. Although I know that I cannot\u2014as in my 6-year-old boyhood fantasy\u2014score the winning try in the final as the replacement for Sean Fitzpatrick, I can help us make the cup a success, and make sure that the tens of thousands of visitors come away with a positive view of New Zealand. The World Cup in 2011 will be the biggest event to come to New Zealand in a generation, and our best chance to brand ourselves on the world stage as clean and green. With the prestige of the World Cup will come huge economic benefits, but also massive risks to our important and valuable brand if we are seen to drop the ball on sustainability. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003ELast year the Guardian and the New York Times ran very damaging yet accurate articles on our environmental performance. Just last week New Zealand dropped from 1st to 15th on Yale and Columbia Universities\u2019 Environmental Performance Index. I am not suggesting we cancel the cup to avoid embarrassment and brand risk; I am suggesting we make \u201C100% Pure New Zealand\u201D a reality. The World Cup could add the urgency to a raft of cost-effective, job-producing green initiatives from transport to housing and from energy to waste. At present we are sleepwalking towards the worst outcome: waking up the day after the final with a mess to clean up and nothing to show for the party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EIn summary, I am not motivated to action by an apocalyptic nightmare of environmental crisis; rather, I am inspired by a vision of pristine rivers; of clean, fast transport; and of an economy that measures more of the things that really matter. I thank all the members in this House for their warm welcome, as well as the cleaners, the security guards, and the staff, who do such great work. I thank my wife, Meghan: my soulmate, best mate, and source of strength. I thank my parents, Ambrose and Gill; my parents-in-law, Mark and Kerry; my stepmother, Jill; and all my other family, friends, and colleagues here tonight and watching online. It is as much to their credit as it is to mine that I am standing here tonight. To my son, Arlo, who is my inspiration and source of hope, I say: \u201CYou remind me that each and every day it is not enough just to live; you have to have something to live for.\u201D To everyone whom I have had the privilege of addressing tonight, and to all future generations, I say that I wish I could change the science of climate change and the facts of inequality. I cannot, so I am going to change the politics. Kia ora. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e8620b1b6afe4be29993bef4f992a81f\u0022\u003ESittings of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222dc76bbf281a421c8b768f0fa4686f18\u0022\u003ESittings of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u0022168e1c81d7574532aeb58fb38725964b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022168e1c81d7574532aeb58fb38725964b\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave for the House to lift early for the dinner break, returning at 7 p.m. to continue in urgency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d0539f034d349deb611191795831ceb\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is no objection. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 5.57 p.m. to 7 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002285cbd80189c340858aafddd3b3dd9cb7\u0022\u003EAccident Compensation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002289f67c8b95b2448f829c85b2ca26de9f\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000851\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002280b11f68-6b57-4b8b-8922-aecd1d471975\u0022 data-id=\u0022b468daabd3f54d86adbbf3c8409f526b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002280b11f68-6b57-4b8b-8922-aecd1d471975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b468daabd3f54d86adbbf3c8409f526b\u0022\u003EHon PANSY WONG (Associate Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to take a call in the debate on the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. How wonderful it is to have legislation that people can remember the name of and say what it is. The previous Opposition speaker was the Hon David Parker, and nothing distinguished more between National and Labour than what that speaker said and where National stands on accident compensation. The Hon David Parker apparently took the side of Graeme Burton. He is standing on the side of Graeme Burton. But members on this side of the House are so proud of our Minister for ACC, the Hon Nick Smith, who introduced legislation to remove lump-sum income compensation and non-essential rehabilitation for criminals. Members on this side of the House are very proud of our Minister for ACC, the Hon Nick Smith, who is standing on the side of law-abiding citizens having access to accident compensation, unlike the Hon David Parker who is standing on the side of Graeme Burton. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002280b11f68-6b57-4b8b-8922-aecd1d471975\u0022\u003EThe reason why we are here today, passing this legislation, is the 9 long years of incompetent governance and financial monitoring of accident compensation by the previous Labour Government. Let me illustrate this with facts. In the year 2000 the Hon Michael Cullen came to the House and said that the Labour Cabinet had decided to set a levy for accident compensation in the years 2001 and 2002 at 31c, to make the scheme fully funded by 2014. The Hon Michael Cullen said that setting the levy for the residual liabilities at 31c would make the scheme fully funded by 2014, so he set the levy at 35c, and surely that would have made the scheme fully funded 2 or 3 years earlier. I, as an accountant, and most of the members in this House, probably get it now that according to the Hon Michael Cullen the accident compensation scheme should have been fully funded by next year, 2011. But here we are, in this House today, trying to pass legislation to extend the period before full funding, which Labour says it supports, and so it should. We are pushing back the year for full funding from 2014 to 2019. After 9 long years of Labour\u2019s carefree attitude, when it simply extended the scheme, and the lack of due diligence monitoring of the accident compensation financial performance, a fully funded scheme has to be pushed back by another 5 years. The original date was 2014, and the Hon Michael Cullen said the scheme should have been fully funded by 2011. We do not need to hear any more lecturing in the speeches made by members on the Opposition benches. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002280b11f68-6b57-4b8b-8922-aecd1d471975\u0022\u003EI am looking forward to hearing from the former Ministers for ACC the Hon Ruth Dyson and the Hon Maryan Street whether they will take a call to explain to people why it is that once we used to have a world-class accident compensation scheme, but after 9 long years of the incompetent governance and incompetent financial monitoring of those two Ministers, we have been reduced to having to come to this House to push back full funding from 2014 to 2019, and the levy is going up; it is going through the sky. We are looking forward to see how those two former Ministers can explain why, over 9 long years, we have had to suffer and see the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) incur firstly a loss of $2.4 billion and then a loss of $4.8 billion. It is the largest loss ever incurred by any Government corporation. Those former Ministers have done something that I am not sure they should be proud of. We do not need to hear any lecturing from them, because after the 9 long years of their governance of accident compensation we have to sit under urgency today in this House to pass legislation firstly to extend the timetable for full funding from 2014 to 2019, and, secondly, to reverse what was done in the dying days of the previous Labour Government, when it pushed forward all these extensions without fully considering how those extensions were to be funded. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002280b11f68-6b57-4b8b-8922-aecd1d471975\u0022\u003EWe are fortunate that we have a Minister for ACC, the Hon Nick Smith, who took up the issue and took a responsible position. He has taken the hard decision to make sure that accident compensation can continue to be sustainable for a long time. I believe that the debate in this House and the rationale for this legislation are plain for everybody to see. I just remind the Labour Opposition that a National Government introduced the accident compensation scheme into the country. We are the ones who take every pride and have every interest in keeping it sustainable. We did not need the 9 long years of an incompetent Labour Government to put the scheme at risk. I have pleasure in taking a call in this debate to support this legislation to once again restore accident compensation back to a sustainable scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u0022ef2f2128e7004eab8f1c6bc760249f64\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ef2f2128e7004eab8f1c6bc760249f64\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to begin by saying that this legislation, from beginning to end, is a complete travesty. It is a complete abrogation of the responsibility that comes with a social contract, which is what accident compensation used to be and will be until, in about an hour\u2019s time, this third reading is concluded. It has been a travesty from the very beginning with its title, with the amendment that the Minister wishes to pass to call it the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. Funnily enough, he did not want to call it that at the introduction of the legislation. He did not want to call it that at the second reading of the legislation. It has been only in the Committee stage that he decided suddenly to call it the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill, and I wonder why that is. Taking out the words \u201Cinjury prevention, rehabilitation, and compensation\u201D from the title of this bill does not augur well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EFirst of all, it is an abrogation of those difficult bits\u2014injury prevention that is successful, and injury prevention that is long-term and sustainable\u2014across those six areas of critical injury prevention activity that Labour put in place in those 9 years that it was in Government, I say to Minister Wong. Injury prevention was beginning to take effect, and the abrogation of this Government\u2019s responsibility in that respect will see us going backwards. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI want to recap on some of the principles of the scheme and talk about what Sir Owen Woodhouse and his fellow commissioners originally intended, and the kinds of principles upon which they built the scheme to begin with, some 40-odd years ago. The number of principles was about five, and the first one of these was community responsibility. Community responsibility meant that everybody paid a little, and everybody got a lot. Everybody put in something and everybody got a lot back as and when they needed it. That goes to the heart of the kind of scheme that the accident compensation scheme is. For me and for Labour, it goes to the heart of the kind of society we want. That is what the scheme was about. This Government is shifting the basis of it away from community responsibility towards privatisation faster than one can think of. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002297ee07d206fd42a88a3e81fc032c8894\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Where is that in the bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229668faac3d504418aae01d75c7ecf8c0\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: Just because the word is not there does not mean that privatisation is not on the agenda. The Government is preparing for that on the basis of a private insurance model. Nothing could be more different from a social contract. The scheme will not represent a social contract underpinned by community responsibility any more, and that is a tragedy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EReal compensation was another principle that the Woodhouse report emphasised. Real compensation is offended against by clause 55 of the bill, which takes the earnings of casual workers and divides them not by the weeks they have worked in order to achieve fair compensation, but by 52 weeks in the year. That Minister comes from Nelson. I wish he would start to represent the people of Nelson, because he seems to be ignorant of the fact that some 76 percent of the earners in Nelson earn less than $40,000 a year, and therefore made nothing from the tax cuts that the National Government trumpeted so loudly last year\u2014nothing, not a bean, not a brass razoo. He wants to calculate compensation like this. If somebody works 40 weeks\u2014as is often the case if the person is picking apples, or trimming vines, or harvesting kiwifruit in Nelson\u2014instead of dividing his or her earnings by the number of weeks worked, let us say 40 weeks, he now, under this legislation, is dividing those earnings by 52 weeks in the year. Everybody knows that that is a smaller amount, and when 80 percent of that becomes compensation, I tell the Minister that that inflicts hardship on people in his patch. That Minister needs to front up to those people and explain what he has done, instead of telling one story in Nelson and another story in Wellington. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EComplete rehabilitation is another principle, and that has been offended against by this legislation, as well. Clause 4 of the bill now has rehabilitation back into work happening at 30 hours a week. Never mind what people used to earn or the kind of job they used to be in, now people will be assessed as being fit for work again if they can work 30 hours a week, regardless of the occupation they used to be in, or the salary they used to earn. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EComprehensive entitlement is another principle that is being infringed and offended against by this legislation. That is apparent in clause 6, where it says that a person has to have a 6 percent hearing loss now in order to qualify for some accident compensation entitlements. A 6 percent hearing loss is significant; that was demonstrated at the select committee. It is not now just a matter of having a 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 percent hearing loss. If a person has that level of hearing loss, I am sorry, but that person does not qualify any more. Here we have levies going up and entitlements cut. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EAdministrative efficiency was the fifth of the principles underpinning the scheme. There was nothing wrong with the administrative efficiency of the scheme. In fact, PricewaterhouseCoopers of Australia determined that the scheme was run more efficiently than any other compensation scheme in the world. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c79ff4b327c741359142d60d299aae29\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: They did not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223033af57b5b74d0ca044d54b9a39d2d1\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: They did so. The amount that the Accident Compensation Corporation expended on administration was minimal compared with other schemes. I say that it is absolutely minimal compared with the profit that would need to be given to private insurance companies, which are poised and ready to swoop in at this Government\u2019s behest. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI would like to say something about some of the half-truths that the Minister has been continually perpetuating in the course of the passage of this legislation. One of the half-truths is about $2.4 billion lost in about 2008. The point is that the investments of the scheme have been performing above the international benchmark for the last decade. In 2008 a recession began in financial institutions overseas. I am not sure whether the Minister is aware of that, but it did. It began to trickle through into the scheme\u2019s investments. Instead of addressing that issue with the kind of hysteria that that Minister has been demonstrating from the beginning to the end of this process, he just needed to take a long view, and watch those investments begin to recover. Sure enough, what did we see? Now the earnings on the scheme\u2019s investments, and on New Zealand superannuation investments, are fuelling the Government\u2019s coffers and improving the Government\u2019s accounts. What do we hear from that Minister? Half-truths. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI will talk about one other aspect about which the Minister has been less than fulsome, and that is injury rates. I will draw to the Minister\u2019s attention in particular some things to do with motorcycles and motorcyclists, because some of those figures the Minister will never let the House know, but these are official figures. In 1973 there were something like 77,000 motorcycles on the road in New Zealand. By 2009 that figure had almost doubled. There were 114,000 motorcycles on the road in New Zealand. But per 10,000 motorcycles on the road, what we see over that period of time, from 1973 to 2009, is a complete falling away in the number of crashes, the number of injuries, and the number of fatalities. In 1973, per 10,000 motorcycles on the road, there were 511 crashes. In 2009 there were 122. The other figures bear that out. We have been fed a diet of half-truths by that Minister, and it is not sufficient. Something is being broken here, and it is a scheme that we\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba3769f6b43f46f19165315643cf57d1\u0022\u003EDr Cam Calder\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. When I last heard about it, a half-truth was akin to a lie, and I do not think it is appropriate that anybody can suggest that a member is lying in the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281a5a5f279244c8cbf6985faed84c08f\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I have been listening very carefully, and the test that the presiding officer applies in this case is whether such a statement is personalised. It is about the argument, rather than the individual. It is kind of just inside the boundary of where a member may go\u2014only just. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c562ca516dc422b8f2e5859b13e0c8c\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: This has been a world-class system, which other countries envy. It is affordable, it is sustainable, and, if the Minister had moved faster and put in the residual levies extension of date clause a year ago, he could have saved every motor vehicle owner in this country $80. There is something rotten in the state of this Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022c895c7a09e01447baabf9fed761848ab\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c895c7a09e01447baabf9fed761848ab\u0022\u003EKEVIN HAGUE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E It is no secret, I guess, that the Green Party will be voting against the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill at its third reading. I will not repeat the arguments that I have made through the various stages of the legislation, but I will touch on them and build on that somewhat. In the Committee stage I spent most of my time working through the various ways in which this bill erodes the Woodhouse principles. I have to say that I agree with the analysis that Maryan Street has just presented on that. The bill certainly erodes the principles upon which our accident compensation scheme is based. It cuts back on entitlements, and, in my view, and in the view of Green members, it goes back on the deal that the Government made with the New Zealand population at the time that the right to sue was given up. That was the focus of my comments during the Committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EIn the second reading debate I focused on an area where the Greens have a different analysis, I think, from every other party in this House. That area is the issue of the funding basis for accident compensation. Other parties support full funding for accident compensation; the Green Party supports \u201Cpay as you go\u201D funding. We ask why we would choose just this one area of Government activity, accident compensation, to fund in a full-funding way, when we fund all of the other areas\u2014education, social welfare, and health\u2014on a \u201Cpay as you go\u201D basis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EIf we look at the nature of the costs associated with accident compensation, rehabilitation, and injury prevention, we see that in the future the nature of those costs will not be different from the nature of the costs that will be faced in the health sector, for example. So there is no sound argument for using a different method for paying for this scheme\u2014except one. This one rationale is the rationale that we believe the Government has chosen to use this approach to funding\u2014that is, using full funding as a funding mechanism for this scheme makes the scheme more like a suite of insurance schemes or insurance policies. Doing that enables the product of accident compensation to be comparable to those of commercial insurance companies, and that will enable, first of all, competition from the private sector, then, ultimately, the privatisation of ACC. We believe that is the agenda.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EI have to say that in the second reading debate it was heartening, on the one hand, to hear from the M\u0101ori Party that it will now be voting against this bill. It is heartening because the bill is a bad one and it should be opposed. On the other hand, it is a double-edged sword because given that the M\u0101ori Party is voting against the bill, the Government will now be relying on the ACT Party for its support. I think we all know in this House and outside the House what the price of that will be. National, which said in its campaign that there would be no privatisation and no competition in the first term of a National Government, will now be \u201Creluctantly forced\u201D to the point of saying that in order to get ACT\u2019s support it will have to move on that competition now, instead. It is a double-edged sword, but I welcome the M\u0101ori Party to the righteous side of the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EI will draw a quick parallel with a couple of other areas. The health portfolio is one of mine, and I have pointed out in debates on health, for example, that the Government, in requiring district health boards to contract out more surgery to the private sector, is doing something that will draw specialised staff from the public sector into the private sector, thus undermining the capacity of the public sector and leading towards greater privatisation in the health sector. In the education sector, to draw a parallel with the United States, national standards are a precursor to vouchers, and vouchers presage privatisation in education.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003ESo what we are seeing is a change from the Government\u2019s first year of office. I think it is fair to say that from right across the community there were many criticisms of the Government. People were saying that this Government was just engaging in a grab bag of unconnected populist issues. That is what people were saying in the first year, and maybe that was a fair criticism. But now we start to see a programme. We start to see a programme that, right across the range of social services, sees a withdrawal of this Government from the role that the State has played. It is a Government that has an agenda of a smaller State, with a bigger role for the private sector.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EIt is no secret that the Green Party stands on the other side of the line on that debate, but I recognise that it is a legitimate political philosophy to say that the State should be minimal, and that social services should be provided by the private sector. If that is the philosophy that National wants to espouse, it should do so. My objection to that is that we are seeing that philosophy and that approach emerging by stealth here in the second year of National\u2019s term. It is not the basis on which that party went to the population, and I say that it should be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003ENow I want to draw on some comments from a former Prime Minister of this country, Michael Joseph Savage. When Savage was defending the Social Security Act across the House from attacks by opponents, he said this: \u201CThe honourable gentlemen\u201D\u2014in those days, of course, they were\u2014\u201Con the Opposition benches want to turn back the clocks. I want to know why people should not have security\u2014why people should not have security in the evening of their days, or when they are invalided. What is there more important in Christianity than to be our brothers\u2019 keepers in reality?\u201D. I am not a Christian, as members of the House know, but I would substitute my own version of the latter part of that statement, and ask what is more important, in being part of society, than taking a collective social responsibility for one another? That was one of the principles upon which the accident compensation scheme had its origins\u2014one of the bases on which New Zealanders gave up their right to sue\u2014and I say that this bill, this approach to accident compensation, represents a fundamental derogation of the principles. I say that the Green Party stands, instead, for a fair go for all. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022 data-id=\u002224b487ad96f941c492f3b7dacf30f658\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002224b487ad96f941c492f3b7dacf30f658\u0022\u003EJOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E When we started this debate the Minister for ACC, the Hon Nick Smith, set out a number of reasons why we need to pass this bill. He talked about the big increase in levies that would be necessary were it not for the passing of this bill. In particular he referred to the fact that a person on the average income will end up paying a further $300 a year into the earners account, through the earners levy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EHe went on to talk about the cost increases that the accident compensation scheme has incurred and the escalating costs of claims. He said the cost of claims had increased by some 57 percent over the last 4 years, from $2.2 billion to $3.5 billion. He talked about the difference in the approach that both Labour and National were taking to full funding of the scheme\u2019s ongoing liability. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EIt was interesting that immediately following Nick Smith\u2019s speech we heard from the Hon David Parker, who accused the Minister of telling half-truths. In particular he said that the Labour Party\u2019s policy on full funding of the liability to 2019 is well known and well documented. He said that Mr Smith was misrepresenting Labour\u2019s position. He went on to say that it was a consequence of the delay of full funding that enabled those reductions in the levy\u2014that if it were not for the delay in full funding, the levies would have to go up by $300. So he attempted to answer\u2014quite reasonably, I thought\u2014some of the comments made by Mr Smith. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EBut what was interesting about Mr Parker\u2019s response was that he was absolutely silent on the issue of the increasing cost of claims. Mr Smith said that the cost of claims had gone up by 57 percent in 4 years\u2014five times the rate of inflation. What was Mr Parker\u2019s response to that? He was happy to respond to some of the other claims the Minister made, but he failed to respond to that. I take that deafening silence as an acknowledgment that Mr Parker knows full well that in the last 4 years the cost of claims has gone from $2.2 billion to $3.5 billion\u2014a 57 percent increase. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EMr Smith also said that when the Hon Maryan Street signed off on the accounts to June 2008, she signed off on a loss of $2.4 billion, and I have not heard any denial of that. The Hon Maryan Street, quite reasonably in my opinion, has said that the year to June 2009 was impacted by the effect of the world financial crisis, and I think she has a very valid point. However, I note that the recovery in the world markets has not reversed that $4.5 billion loss. I also note that Mr Smith acknowledged the impact of the global financial crisis, but he also made the point that of the $2.4 billion loss in 2008, only $1 million was a consequence of those financial losses. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EWhy do we need this legislation? It must be patently obvious to anyone who has listened with an unbiased view to this debate that we need this legislation because the scheme has grown to such an extent that the country can no longer afford it. We cannot continue to live in a fool\u2019s paradise where costs increase year after year by five times the rate of inflation. That model has been followed around the world. We see it in Turkey right now; we see it in Spain. We see developed countries in the Western World facing bankruptcy and not actually being able to go out into the world markets and raise money to pay for the running of those countries. Let us hope that New Zealand never comes to that situation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EWhat has driven the significant cost increase? There has been an expansion of the scheme, and a significant number of new entitlements. We have talked about suicide. When the accident compensation legislation was first brought into the House there was no provision for suicide. As Mr Smith said, suicide is a tragedy\u2014it is a real tragedy\u2014but it is not an accident. He is absolutely right: it is not an accident, but it is a tragedy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EI come back to a point that the Hon Maryan Street made in her second reading speech, which I have already referred to twice in this debate. She quite rightly said that because of the advances in medical science, people who would have died in an accident 20 or 30 years ago can live today. That is one of the great things about medical science: people who in past circumstances would have died can today live. But there is a cost to that, and the community is prepared to pay that cost because life is precious. People who survive accidents may survive in a paralysed state, or they may be tetraplegics. As the Hon Maryan Street said, the cost of keeping a young person alive in that state for the rest of his or her life may go up to $20 million. I heard her talk to the Committee this morning about that cost. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EAs a society New Zealanders have been prepared to pay that cost because life is very precious. But we need to recognise that the cost to the country has been an increase in claims of 12 percent per annum\u2014five times the rate of inflation\u2014over the last 4 years. I think that is also important in terms of why we need to fund the costs as they fall. The ACT Party disagrees with the Green Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EThe reality is that when the scheme first came into existence, in 1972, medical science was such that people involved in major, serious accidents were more likely to die than to survive. But as time has gone on the number of survivors of what would otherwise have been fatal accidents has grown and grown. One might start, say, with five tetraplegics, and that number can balloon to 10, 20, 50, 100, or 200. Members can imagine the escalating cost. New Zealand society has been prepared to pay that cost, but it is a cost that falls when the accidents occur. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EI note that the Green Party campaigned at the last election with an image of a young girl. Green members talked about her future. They said we had her future in our hands. Well, I ask Mr Hague why he would bequeath to young people the costs of the previous generation. He drew the distinction about fully funding education and health on a \u201Cpay as you go\u201D model, but that is not how we fund superannuation, and it is certainly not how Labour would like us to fund superannuation. Labour\u2019s plan, of course, was to have the Cullen fund\u2014the Superannuation Fund. When the Government moved away from that model because it was not prepared to borrow to fund those investments we heard all sorts of criticism from Labour. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EI come back to the issue of competition and privatisation. Let us not forget that in 1998 the National Government finally had the courage to open up the earners account to competition. As a consequence of that, premiums dropped by some 30 percent. The tragedy is that the National Government did not make that move 6 years earlier so that the benefits that flowed through from that could be well and truly embedded when Labour came to power in 1999, and so that Labour was not able to dispense with those huge benefits. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EFinally, I come to the issue of privatisation. I know Mr Hague criticised privatisation earlier. Let us look at the situation with cataract operations. Life-restoring cataract operations give people the ability to see. The reality is that ophthalmologists working in public hospitals, as Mr Hague will well know, do three or four sight-restoring operations in a morning or an afternoon, whereas the output is eight operations when the same operation is done by the same surgeons in a private hospital. That is the benefit of private medicine. That is the benefit of incentivising a surgeon. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003EACT members want to offer competition and choice, so we will be supporting this bill. We do so proudly, but we wish it had not been necessary. If National had had the courage to make the changes that were required in 1992 and 1993, the scheme would not be in the state of financial disrepair it is in today. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022 data-id=\u0022d29bdb50c4a345928cf911879ea54178\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d29bdb50c4a345928cf911879ea54178\u0022\u003ERAHUI KATENE (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tonga):\u003C/span\u003E The purpose of the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill is stated as seeking to improve flexibility in the accident compensation scheme. Flexibility is a wonderful thing. The definition of \u201Cflexibility\u201D is \u201Cto increase movement with a bit of stretching\u201D. Although physical flexibility may well be part of an effective accident compensation rehabilitation scheme, the only stretching this bill appears to indulge in is stretching the truth. For in improving flexibility, the bill is actually reducing entitlements and Crown costs, which will in turn decrease access to accident compensation cover and lower the compensation for vulnerable populations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EWe in the M\u0101ori Party always say that our past informs our present. Two years ago, in 2008, the M\u0101ori Party supported the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 2), which improved access and entitlements to compensation for some disenfranchised groups. These groups were itemised as seasonal casual workers, those in non-standard work, those mentally injured by trauma, those between work, and young people who are injured. The responsibility to support all of these groups of vulnerable citizens is repealed today in the third reading of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EAlthough the context provided for the bill is to make accident compensation affordable and fair, the changes will disproportionately impact on vulnerable workers and low-income families, as the bill decreases access to cover and decreases the level of compensation to these claimants. We are on the record as supporting the right of all of these groups to receive entitlement to compensation and cover. We are hardly likely to turn round and renege on that support a couple of years on. But I think we cannot go any further into this debate without looking even further back into history, at the very foundations of the scheme. Submitters from the Human Rights Commission went to the select committee and reminded Parliament of the origins of accident compensation as \u201Ca form of social insurance\u201D. They discussed the original scheme as being \u201Ca trade-off between the right to sue for compensatory damages and comprehensive, no-fault cover in the event of an accident.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EAs other speakers have noted, the accident compensation scheme was established following a 1967 royal commission into workers\u2019 compensation in New Zealand. The royal commission was established to address the inadequacy of workers\u2019 compensation benefits, as well as other anomalies around coverage. The report produced by the commission, known as the Woodhouse report, recommended replacing tort liability for personal injury with a new, universal, 24-hour, no-fault approach to compensation and services to the injured. The Woodhouse principles remain important today: community responsibility, comprehensive entitlement, complete rehabilitation, fair and real compensation, and administrative efficiency. Some 40 years after the accident compensation scheme was introduced, it is impressive that a report by PricewaterhouseCoopers on a review of it concluded that \u201Cthe current ACC scheme is consistent with the Woodhouse Principles\u201D. But the report went even further. It suggested that the scheme adds considerable value to New Zealand society and the economy, and performs comparatively well internationally. In fact, in the last 10 years, the investment team of the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has been one of the top performers, and has outperformed even the Cullen fund at far less the cost of fund managers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EI remind the House of our policy position on accident compensation. The M\u0101ori Party supports the right of employees to be treated fairly and with dignity, and their right to a safe and healthy workplace. Our interest is in holding employers accountable for preventable workplace-related deaths and injury. Indeed, one of the members\u2019 bills we have developed is a corporate manslaughter bill. This bill is based on similar innovative legislation in the United Kingdom, the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, which has been described as a landmark in law. In the UK, companies and organisations can now be found guilty of corporate manslaughter as a result of serious management failures resulting in a gross breach of the duty of care. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EWhy would we put up such a bill? Quite frankly, there has been a widespread acknowledgment in recent years that New Zealand has a serious problem to deal with. New Zealand sits in the 23rd position in the league table of fatal accident rates, with much higher rates than the best countries. In fact, in a 2005 survey of the annual reports of 100 large companies for the Department of Labour, the following deficiencies were noted, despite 13 years since the enactment of the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992. Only 30 percent of companies reported having arrangements for consulting employees on health and safety, and only 15 percent of the companies mentioned setting targets in health and safety. So there are big issues around the very concept of injury prevention that need to be addressed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EOf course, a major one for the M\u0101ori Party is the fact that access for M\u0101ori has been consistently lower than for other groups. The data available demonstrates that M\u0101ori receive treatment at a lower level than non-M\u0101ori, and where services are accessed, they are accessed later and programmes are exited earlier. Even though ACC undertook initiatives to improve access through information programmes and better engagement with M\u0101ori communities, these programmes have not demonstrated sufficient success to close the delivery gap. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EWe have raised previously the fact that M\u0101ori are disproportionately involved in very dangerous occupations such as forestry, roadworks, construction, etc. Our biggest fear about the possibility of privatisation is that private insurance companies would make the insurance premium higher than the current accident compensation levies, especially for dangerous jobs, because of the high possibility of getting hurt. The insurance premium would more than likely be too high for M\u0101ori to be motivated to take out that insurance. Then there is the problem of going to court, as insurance companies continually try to go to court to try to resist making insurance payouts. The changes will then place the onus on the taxpayer to go out and find an insurance policy that will meet their particular needs\u2014a change that I think would not be at all beneficial for the M\u0101ori community. In short, transforming the levy into a premium will simply not give us, as the advertisements say, the peace of mind. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EFinally, the M\u0101ori Party came to this bill conscious of a large range of concerns that had come in from our constituents. We were approached about opposition to increased levies, especially from motorcyclists, to sexual abuse compensation rules, and to a threshold of 6 percent hearing loss before people are entitled to assistance with hearing aids. There were also concerns over privatisation and reduced coverage. Although many changes might seem to be minor, the cumulative effect will undermine the concept of accident compensation as it is currently understood. Over and above all these changes, we know that injury is the leading cause of death for M\u0101ori for the first three decades of life. M\u0101ori are over-represented in injury statistics across all age groups and in employment and sports. Most of these injuries are preventable. As Dr John Broughton reported in his 1999 report Injury to Maori: Does it really have to be like this?: \u201CAlthough the frond will eventually die, it need not wither or die so soon or before its time.\u201D There are far too many issues associated with a full and comprehensive injury prevention scheme to approve the changes put forward in this bill. We must oppose this third reading. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u0022a50a7b4192214233b680cac156ad62fe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a50a7b4192214233b680cac156ad62fe\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I will not take long on the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. I think we have canvassed a lot of the issues already during the last day or so. I thank members of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, who worked very well to get this legislation through the committee in a timely fashion. I also thank all those who have taken an active role and interest in seeing the New Zealand accident compensation system become the best system it can be and one that will survive into the future. When we look at it, we see that is at the heart of what the Government is doing here. We want to see the scheme survive, and we want to see it be there for people. We want to maintain a system that gives New Zealanders the comfort that they expect and have seen in their accident compensation system for generations now. By doing what we are today, we are allowing New Zealanders to have the security of knowing that accident compensation will be there for them in the future. I think the key thing that people in this House need to understand is that this bill is about saving the scheme. It is about making it sustainable over the long term. It has nothing to do with what the Labour Opposition members have been saying over the last day or so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EI will go through two things, but first of all I say there has been an abuse of process in this House today. The constant amendments that were put up, when there was a particular issue there that is in the best interests of New Zealand, are a tactic that Labour Party members need to reflect upon. The public out there will not want to see this House waste its time and resources, when we are trying to do something good for the New Zealand people. Putting up frivolous amendments all day does not really endear the Labour members to the New Zealand public. That is something the Labour Party might want to take on board for future circumstances. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003ETwo very important things came out of today. The first one is that we heard a constant barrage from the Opposition members about the Woodhouse principles. They say the bill is contrary to the principles that were first adopted in accident compensation, and that it takes away the principles that were there. I say we should look at that in a historical context: we had the Woodhouse report, the accident compensation system, and, in the last term of the previous Labour Government, the changes to the system. Those changes were not based on the Woodhouse principles but on the political whim of that Government. We are not reversing the Woodhouse principles. The Woodhouse principles set up the accident compensation system. What we are looking at are some of the changes that were made in recent years to the system, and the legislation does not affect the Woodhouse principles. I think the public out there needs to be very much aware that the Woodhouse principles are intact, that the accident compensation system is intact, and that the National Government has made sure that is the case. We have not dealt with the Woodhouse principles in the way that the Labour Party has contended over the last day or so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EThe second very important thing that came out of the last day or so is the idea of full funding. The National Party is committed to that. We have extended the time frame in order to enable that to happen. The Labour Party started this debate not knowing where it stood on that. We looked at Maryan Street\u2019s face during the debate. When she was asked whether she supported full funding, she was deliberately quiet. She did not want to commit herself to supporting full funding. But what happened today? David Parker sat down beside her today, and in response to a speech during the Committee stage, he said the Labour Party was committed to full funding. That is what the Labour Party policy is, and Labour members were backing this legislation, but they could not vote for it. Labour backed this legislation, but would not vote for something that was in the best interests of what New Zealanders wanted. That shows the state that the Labour Party is in at the moment. The Labour members do not know what they stand for, and when they do know what they stand for they are not willing to stand up for it. That is the problem with the Labour Party. That is why it is polling so badly and why the public will see great credit in what National has done to retain the accident compensation system, and will not be listening to the arguments that have been put up against this legislation today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EI commend this bill to the House, and I look forward to it being enacted tonight. I thank all those involved in the process, especially members of the select committee and the officials involved. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u00220da55b2f64e34567ae630d5019ae7f62\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220da55b2f64e34567ae630d5019ae7f62\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills):\u003C/span\u003E The member who just resumed his seat, David Bennett, talked about ensuring that accident compensation will be there for injured New Zealanders. That is a good aspiration, and I am pleased that the member spoke about that. What the member did not add to his great vision for the security of accident compensation in the future was \u201Cexcept if people have a work-induced hearing loss of less than 6 percent\u201D, because that is now a \u201Cgone-burger\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EIf workers are injured before they have used up all their holidays, their holiday pay is a \u201Cgone-burger\u201D. This bill takes away support for seasonal workers who make the foolish mistake of getting injured early in the season instead of later in the season. The same is true for part-time workers and those in middle or high income jobs who are injured and want the dignity of returning to a job where they can earn about the same as they used to. Their support is gone under this legislation. If one is a family member of someone who is so inconsiderate that he or she takes their own life, then support for that family has gone as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThis Parliament, in the third reading of this bill, doctored by Dr Nick Smith, will now make a moral judgment that the family of a person who dies in a plane crash, a train crash, or on the road, or from any other injury, is more worthy of support than the family member of someone who takes his or her own life. It will make a moral judgment about the value to that family of a person\u2019s life. The person is still dead. The family still has to pay for the funeral. The family will not have that income coming into their home. The person is dead. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe fact that the person took his or her own life actually makes it harder for the family. Most members in this House will know a family where one member has taken his or her own life. Most of us will have had that sort of experience. The family is often overwhelmed with grief, as well as guilt, because, on a daily basis, they think that something they may have done differently could have altered the decision of that person to take his or her own life. But let us not worry about that, says David Bennett. Let us punish them again by not giving them any support for the funeral and not giving them any support for the lost income. So the wonderful words\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229365f935cf3a49bd90959614464fc021\u0022\u003EHon Sir Roger Douglas\u003C/span\u003E: Have you calculated the $9 million for physiotherapy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0ef905c75b541c5ae537176a6490bec\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON\u003C/span\u003E: What was that noise from the grave? Oh, sorry, it was Sir Roger Douglas\u2014the ghost of a lot of things past is still giving the same speeches. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EIt is very interesting to hear all the scaremongering that goes on about how much money the accident compensation scheme has lost, how much money it needs, and how the rate of claimants\u2019 costs has exploded. But Nick Smith never once mentioned the substantial change in the funding need, the substantial levy reductions that would be caused by one alteration\u2014that is, extending the date for full funding. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EOne alteration was actually all that was needed. David Parker had a member\u2019s bill before the House. The Government could have adopted David Parker\u2019s member\u2019s bill and we would not have needed to slash the entitlement of people who have hearing loss, people who have saved up their holidays, people who are seasonal workers, and people who are family members of someone who has taken his or her own life. None of that would have been necessary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe Minister has been caught out so many times with his half-truths about the accident compensation scheme being broke, bankrupt, and unsustainable that nobody believes it any more. He was also caught out when he said that motorcycle injury numbers have ballooned. Apparently, just about everyone in New Zealand who rode a motorcycle was falling off and breaking something. Apparently, they were all damaging themselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EAt the end of my speech I will seek leave to table those figures, but I tell the House that despite the increase in the number of motorcycles between 1973 and 2009\u2014an increase of half again\u2014the number of injuries between those dates went from 551 in 1973 to 86 in 2009, per 10,000 on-road motorcycles. Those are the numbers: 551 in 1973 and 86 in 2009. The Minister looks as though he is trying to swallow his tongue; he has gone suddenly quiet. The number of fatalities went from 17 in 1973 to just under 4\u00BD. How can those numbers justify what Dr Smith told motorbike riders around the country? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThose are the facts\u2014as opposed to what Dr Smith was telling people\u2014in the same way that the select committee report on the bill gives us facts about the comparative costs with the accident compensation equivalent in Australia. The figures have been adjusted to look at the differences in the schemes\u2014what the cover is. So these are apples with apples comparisons. The South Australian cost per $100 in Australian earnings is $3.14, in New South Wales it is $1.94, and in Western Australia it is $1.51. The Australian average\u2014an apples with apples comparison\u2014as reported back by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, including the National members\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eccd1971aa234cd39f03196fb4011e4e\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: What year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229461750984404209b9c507b9f4a5c49b\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON\u003C/span\u003E: The year 2006-07. The Minister should have read the report. The Australian average is $1.72, and what is the New Zealand rate? It is 94c. PricewaterhouseCoopers, a reasonably well-regarded organisation, said that the New Zealand scheme was more efficient than any other scheme in the world. So the system is not broke. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003ESo what do we have in this legislation to consider? We have a bill that means people will now be paying more in their levies\u2014employers and individuals\u2014and they will get less, because this bill is about cuts. We now have a new threshold that people have to reach for hearing loss in their workplace before they will get any accident compensation cover and support. A hearing loss of 6 percent is a big hearing loss, actually. It does not mean that someone can hear 94 percent of things. It is a significant loss, as the select committee heard and described to the House. But if someone has a hearing loss of 6 percent or less, that is bad luck. So it is now all right for employers to injure their workers just a little bit, as long as it is not more than 6 percent. This is an arbitrary figure and it is crazy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe vocational independence work capacity test has been absolutely gutted. There is no consideration of the person\u2019s pre-injury earning capacity, no consideration that the person needs to be able to work 35 hours a week rather than 30, and no consideration of the fact that he or she should have a real job to go to. The person who has been injured should have the dignity of a real job entitlement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003ESeasonal workers need to plan for their injury to occur during the later part of the season because if they get injured at the beginning, then their non-work time, prior to their starting the job, is counted\u2014no earnings, less money. That is just a disgrace. It is bad luck for people who get injured and have holidays owing to them. If they have not taken some holidays and were looking forward to taking them in 3 or 4 months time, it is bad luck for them. They will have to use up their holiday pay before they are entitled to accident compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003ESo this bill is full of cuts, despite the fact that all of us are facing accident compensation levy hikes this year. This is absolutely about paying more and getting less. The reason I am so angry about this legislation is twofold. First of all, it is not necessary. The Minister has misrepresented the facts of the situation in order to justify major changes to entitlements. But the stronger reason for me is that this is about real people. It is about real people who have been injured. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EDuring the Committee stage I talked about one of my constituents whose family I have worked with a lot, and I know that they will be devastated by this. The constituent I mentioned earlier in the debate was Jason Gibson, who was a 29-year-old spray painter. He loved his job, he loved his wife, he loved his parents, and he loved his little daughter. He went to his parents\u2019 home one day, and said he had hay fever - like symptoms and had had a nosebleed the day before. His father recommended that he have a blood test, because as a painter he might have lead poisoning. Six days later, Jason died from leukaemia caused by inhaling the solvents at his work. Injury prevention, high-quality rehabilitation and compensation should be the focus, not cuts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022 data-id=\u00229b53d741c516482daba098e4f9a52949\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229b53d741c516482daba098e4f9a52949\u0022\u003ETIM MACINDOE (National\u2014Hamilton West):\u003C/span\u003E I am grateful for a brief opportunity to promote this measure in its final stages through the House. It will be patently obvious to viewers and listeners around the country that we have been treated to some barefaced and shameful rewriting of history by members opposite during the various stages of this bill, but the public is not fooled and will not be fooled by the spin, because the substance is there for everybody to see. The substance is Labour\u2019s legacy, and it is an appalling one. The loss of $4.8 billion, as reported in the 2008-09 annual report, should leave all members of the previous Government collectively hanging their heads in shame.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003EI commend this Minister for ACC and this Government for confronting the appalling problems that Labour not only ignored but also exacerbated during the latter period of its time in office. The options the Minister has confronted were unpalatable but unavoidable. The Minister is charting a prudent and responsible course to rescue and secure a vitally important aspect of our nation\u2019s social infrastructure. New Zealanders will have every reason to be grateful for this measure in the years ahead. I urge all responsible members of this House to give it their full support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u0022fe20d6ecefb2428b890a2c67bbc5965e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fe20d6ecefb2428b890a2c67bbc5965e\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222972bedac7544cc18194352a6ad8df93\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: Two minutes on such an important issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c38a91b6a924125aac8138982a5dd40\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014well, I do not think it was 2 minutes\u2014to talk about what all New Zealanders hold dear; that is, the accident compensation legislation, which is historic in this country. Under the Woodhouse report in 1974 it was about a social contract that delivered us a comprehensive scheme for looking after all who were injured, whether it be at work, in an accident, at home, on a sports field, on the road, or in special circumstances such as a victim of crime, or in rare but tragic circumstance of suicide or sexual abuse.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI say to Nick Smith that in the complex world we live in, there have been changes to the scheme. Some were for good under Labour and some were for bad under National. Nick Smith wants to take us back 3 decades. The broad principles were a fair deal for all\u2014the many, not the few\u2014and the fundamental belief in a society that believes in looking after everyone in hard times. But, no, the National Government wants to take us to the market model, so that means that it is not fair. It means that we will pay more and get less.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc2b74ee3a5440c9afe796c42e46f3b1\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: You can say privatisation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022080b1192db534e73bc8d1c6c29684c1c\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, preparing it for privatisation. What did Woodhouse see in his report? He saw a New Zealand where the delivery of support and justice to all New Zealanders who were injured in any way was not left to the market, with the only winners being lawyers and those who could afford to pay. Woodhouse said that in circumstances of injury, disability, death, no matter how compelling or tragic, it could not be left to the market. There would be minimal justice in that circumstance, and certainly none for those who could not pay. We are seeing now in this House a National Government that is throwing away those principles, that is demeaning any progress that has been made on the Woodhouse recommendations and on the original legislation, and that is wanting to go backwards. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWho will be the losers under National\u2019s changes to accident compensation? They will be low-paid workers, disabled people, and predominantly women workers. My colleague Ruth Dyson talked about those with less than 6 percent hearing loss. Those people do not get any assistance with a hearing aid under National\u2019s proposal. Who will be able to afford that? It is not about the 94 percent hearing that those people have; it is about professional people assessing the disability of clients, and to drive in a 6 percent mandatory rule that no client will get assistance for hearing aids is nothing short of ridiculous. It is absolutely ridiculous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWho will win out of that situation? The only people who will win are those who can afford to sue, because otherwise there is no support. Or people languish on the system that we have under the National Government at the moment to wait for some help from the Ministry of Health, and those people will probably wait for up to a year, at least. New Zealand legislated for a no-fault scheme. There was a very small levy across all New Zealanders. Whether they were employers, business people, sportspeople, or workers, it delivered justice for all in this country. It was not a matter of whether people could afford it; they received the support that they needed and deserved. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EIt was the envy of the world. It put New Zealand completely on the map. It was never ever about choice, which is what we hear so often from members on that side of the House, especially the ACT members. It was never about selling our scheme off to the highest bidder, which is what happened under the previous National Government. It was about a country that wanted to ensure a fair deal for all, and for all New Zealand citizens to receive the support that they needed if they were injured. The National Government and the \u201CVoucher Party\u201D\u2014the ACT Party\u2014take advantage and say: \u201CLet us work with the market.\u201D Now we see that they are cutting into the rights\u2014not privileges; they are rights\u2014that every New Zealander pays for. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThese are their rights under our accident compensation scheme. The principles of that social contract of accident compensation were about social justice for all who suffered injury. It came down to an investment. New Zealanders gave up something. They gave up their right to sue for this scheme. New Zealanders collectively gave up their right to sue on the realisation that, to have an effective scheme both socially and economically\u2014avoiding accidents, getting people back into work, and all those things that are part of a progressive scheme\u2014it would come at a cost. They could not get into the market that the ACT Party promotes about going to the highest bidder or employing lawyers and being able to sue. Through the electoral cycles we have seen what is so predictable. It happens every time we have a National Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI have to ask Nick Smith this time why he is not going for the full monty and going for cutting lump-sum payments. Why is he not doing that? I ask why Nick Smith is not saying that he will cut lump-sum payments, because that is what is in National\u2019s heart. It is about privatisation. I will tell all National members that as long as you have lump-sum payments, no matter how much you denigrate the rights that are entrenched in the accident compensation scheme, which you are doing tonight in this House, your agenda of privatisation\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5da2d9096a64831a9805381dc116afe\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member continues to bring me into the debate, and I know that she knows she should not be doing that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228fe68d44015d4510824a632561a74e66\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker. I know that you are blameless in this and I do apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ca822e15a10414c8c8ed923066b8319\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: And I am not part of The Full Monty, either!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaf6a587921642e88cfa9ed9b50f3557\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: I think that was directed! But if we look at the agenda of the cost cutting and the lump-sum payments of the previous Government, we know we are up for a lot of cuts in the future. Members on this side of the House put up amendments and I think those amendments were very sensible. We said we should have a review to check how much devastation has happened. But it goes round and round.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d27805bca74a4b32a7636bb53a79097e\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: Wait until next term.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202a62632fa9c4fb3b4710d41af16d360\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: The member is right. But what will we see, and where will we see it? We will see cuts, cuts, and more cuts. We will see that for workers, instead of a requirement to return work for 35 hours a week, it will be for 30 hours a week. The Government wants to reduce the return-to-work level to 30 hours a week. That is 30 hours a week when times are hard, in a recession, and when it is very hard to find work. What is this Government\u2019s answer? It is to reduce people\u2019s ability to get back into work. Apart from that, it is for people to use their holiday pay. Holiday pay is actually a right. All New Zealand workers earn their right to holiday pay. They earn it. I tell members on the other side of the House that when people injure themselves at work, it is not a holiday. I say to Nick Smith that it is not a holiday to sit there with a damaged back so one cannot spend time with one\u2019s family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u0022727d95a9177642018b1f99a177aa04e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022727d95a9177642018b1f99a177aa04e1\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E This has been a long journey. It is not one that started with the introduction of this legislation into the House; it started back in 2005, I think, when the financial performance of the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) began to deteriorate. In late 2007 the Department of Labour told the previous Labour Government that Vote ACC was not sufficient by a long chalk to meet the dozen or more extensions to the scheme that that Government planned to put in place. Three times the previous Labour Government was told in 2008 of the well-costed problems that the Department of Labour said would cost $305 million in that year alone, and then $1.5 billion in the out-years. In breach of the Public Finance Act, the previous Labour Government remained silent about that; it failed to put that into the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EThe principal finance change denier, the former Minister for ACC, Maryan Street, had the audacity to suggest that it was she who sent the officials to Nelson after the election to inform the new Minister of the financial crisis. Well, it was too late then. Of all the ranting we have heard from that member, the one thing we have not heard from her, and the one thing that this House and the people of New Zealand are owed, is a single word: sorry. The second principal finance change denier, Mr Parker, challenged the Minister and had the audacity to challenge him on the financial justification for the changes made in this legislation. It is a pity his party did not hold itself to the same high standards of accountability that the member seems to demand of this Government. I simply reject the suggestion that those changes have not been rigorously costed\u2014they have. They are inputted into the proposed levies for 2010-11, and thank goodness they are! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003ELet me share the positive impacts of this Accident Compensation Amendment Bill on those levies. Without this legislation, a worker on the average wage would have faced a $550 per annum increase in accident compensation levies. With it, a worker will face a $150 a year increase. Car registrations would have gone up by $103 a year, but with this legislation the increase will be $30 a year. Employer levies would have gone up by 44 percent without this legislation, but with it the increase will be 12 percent. I find it absolutely amazing that in the over 100 calls that we had in the Committee stage of this bill, not a single Opposition member once mentioned the levy payers. In fact, Ms Dyson just mentioned them in her speech, but there was no other mention of them. The Labour members cannot even bring themselves to use the word \u201Cemployer\u201D. When I was at ACC and the previous administration was in power, it was called the employer account. Labour could not even bring itself to use the term \u201Cemployer\u201D; it had to change the name to the work account, such is its animosity towards employers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EThere has always been a black, a white, and a grey area when it comes to accident compensation. There are those who suffer mishap due to medical conditions, and there are those who clearly suffer the effects of an accident. There is always a grey bit in the middle. I hope you can hear me, Mr Deputy Speaker; there is a really bad buzzing in my ear. Over the last 5 years that grey area has become thicker and thicker. It has become more and more difficult for the corporation to manage that grey area, and I applaud these changes, which bring clarity to the entitlements that every New Zealander has under this scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EMy final comment is to the staff of ACC. It has been a tough year for them. I encourage them to continue the good work that they do for the 1.8 million New Zealanders who are injured every year, the vast majority of whom are cared for well, are rehabilitated in a timely manner, and enjoy a fast and lasting return to work or independence. But I also encourage them to continue to improve that rehabilitation effort and not to resile from the goal of rehabilitating claimants, even when that goal is tough\u2014tough for the claimant; tough for the staff. The Woodhouse report said it was necessary to have a bit of tough love from time to time. But that can be done with compassion, to a high quality, with clear communication, and, above all, with consistency so that claimants from Kait\u0101ia to the Bluff can expect to have the same level of service, the same decisions being made, and the same good-quality care from the corporation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI think this bill makes a very important change that will restore the scheme to its rightful place as a world-leading accident compensation scheme. I applaud it and I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u0022481381f58795456c988ab9c974ea6ba1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022481381f58795456c988ab9c974ea6ba1\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills):\u003C/span\u003E I seek the leave of the House to table a document from the Ministry of Transport, outlining the annual motorcycle numbers and injury and fatality statistics between 1973 and 2009\u2014the facts of the situation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fefee84570b542f0a529a3e3b38033fc\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: When was this document released? On which date?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022602f7f6d5c23450897d3150670ea4bcd\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON\u003C/span\u003E: In 2009, by the Ministry of Transport.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022147a2efb600c4a4f94f6827fdff51333\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Is this document already in the public arena? [Interruption] Yes, it is a point of order. Leave is sought to table this document? Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u0022aca1c8d2e9284ccaba32315e553d246f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aca1c8d2e9284ccaba32315e553d246f\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I seek the leave of the House to table the report received by me as Minister on physiotherapy costs and the disaster that Ruth Dyson brought upon ACC\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220198ac3980b74833851fd55f623f21c8\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, we are not getting\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227acdd5fea06a4443b45d9956ff409cb0\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014in respect of\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281514b21db0542cfbb0f7b22be238dc5\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We are not getting into debate. The Minister has sought leave to table a document. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227076e178a75f49c491a55d8276a0fd94\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e100c5ff90224fb18c087168b4451d91\u0022\u003EChildren, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220bda4a081c1f4bd5b004a9ccf0646f6e\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000962\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 18 February.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b46609059ebd49e2a34b407226fcf417\u0022\u003EPart 2  Amendments to other enactments (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022 data-id=\u0022197731352a254406b0d0887cf9e86911\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022197731352a254406b0d0887cf9e86911\u0022\u003EJACINDA ARDERN (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have a lot to say on Part 2 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill. I think Part 2 demonstrates the far-reaching effect of an issue that has been the source of quite a lot of discussion throughout the debate. That issue is the extension to capture 12 and 13-year-olds in the Act, because that crosses over into the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act, which we find amended in Part 2, and it has some impact on that Act. Those on the Justice and Electoral Committee will know that we have only recently made significant changes to the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act. The way that children and young people are captured in the Act was the source of quite a lot of discussion. I want to touch on that in my contribution. As Chester Borrows, a member of the Social Services Committee, has pointed out, it was his view that the provisions around 12 and 13-year-olds being able to go through the Youth Court were essentially a matter of filtering, and a matter of expediency. But I think this part points out that the provisions make much more of an impact than that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EPart 2 cross-references section 8(1A) of the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995. I want to quickly just reflect on that section, which reads: \u201CHowever, a suspect who is a child or was a child at the time an offence in relation to which he or she may not be lawfully prosecuted (being an indictable offence other than murder or manslaughter) was committed, may consent to the taking of a buccal sample as a result of a Part 2A request.\u201D What we see there is that there are elements of compulsion available to police for the taking of buccal samples for offences such as murder and manslaughter, because we acknowledge that as it stands the 12 and 13-year-olds charged with those offences in our system are already able to be taken through a higher level of court. That section essentially says that for everything else compulsion does not apply; it is voluntary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EThen we come to Part 2 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill. I do not recall there being great lengths of discussion in the select committee about this part, but I want to talk about what is implied by this part. If we look at it we see that replacement clause 41(1A) of the bill says that \u201CHowever a suspect may, in relation to an indictable offence, consent to the taking of a buccal sample as a result of a Part 2A request if the subject is a child, or was a child, at the time the offence is alleged to have been committed, and cannot lawfully be prosecuted in relation to that offence, because it is not an offence of any of the following kinds:\u201D. Before, in section 8(1A) of the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act, we had just the offences of murder or manslaughter. Now, we have an indictable offence as well. Also, going on, are two more criteria, in clause 41(1A)(i) and (ii) of the bill: \u201Cthat is alleged to have been committed when the suspect was aged 12 or 13 years; and for which the maximum penalty available is or includes imprisonment for life or for at least 14 years:\u201D. I want to seek some clarity from the Minister for Social Development and Employment, Paula Bennett, on that clause. I accept that I may have misinterpreted it here, but I do not believe I have. Prior to that we had the case where compulsion in respect of taking buccal samples could be applied for murder and manslaughter. Now we are saying that\u2014outside of murder, manslaughter, and indictable offences with a penalty of up to 14 years\u2014for everything else it is voluntary, but, within that, compulsion can be applied to 12 and 13-year-olds. That is the only assumption that we can make by the reference in this Part 2. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003ESo I would like to seek some clarity from the Minister on that. The reason for that is this: when we discussed the bodily samples bill in the Justice and Electoral Committee the direction from the Minister of Justice was clear. That was that he held grave concerns about the creep that could have occurred on the basis of that legislation. Direct reference was made to the idea that we do not want samples being taken in the backs of police cars from young children without guardians who are there or available. We went to great lengths in that bill to make sure that we cross-referenced the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act and made sure that we carried over the provisions that apply to an interview situation where a guardian or a caregiver must be given the opportunity to be present. We carried over those provisions for certain classes of buccal samples when taken from young people. It seems to me that we did not discuss again those same kinds of protection for our 12 and 13-year-olds in relation to the broadening of that power for those groups. I have great concerns about that. I ask the Minister to clarify the intention, and also whether the change was discussed with the Minister of Justice. I certainly think it is a clause and a proposal that would have been gratefully received and discussed by the Justice and Electoral Committee when we originally discussed the bodily samples legislation. I think we would have had something quite substantive to say on that extension, that broadening of scope and power.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI guess, again, that that all comes back to the flow-on, as I mentioned, of the broadening out of the way we treat our children in our legislation, because this is not just a filtering or a streamlining of our Youth Court and Family Court processes; it has a much broader effect. The importance of this clause is reflected in the fact that we now, as a consequence, are in breach of our obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. I would like to hear the Minister\u2019s thoughts on the impact of those changes on that convention, because\u2014very recently, I know\u2014the Government had an opportunity to appear before the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, but did not mention this bill; it did not mention Part 1, let alone Part 2. Not only were we already in breach, based on the way that our 17-year-olds are treated in the youth justice system, but rather than fixing that, the Government broadened the whole thing out and brought in 12 and 13-year-olds, just for good measure. They are children; as we have continually highlighted throughout this debate, they are still children. That is what I would like to put to the Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EThe reason why the UN, obviously, has a broad definition of whom it considers to be children in that convention and why it is important that they be treated differently is based on research and on evidence. It is based around the ideas of brain development, the impact of young people being in what is deemed a pseudo-adult criminal justice system, and the long-term impact on those children being exposed to an overtly punitive form of criminal justice. I would like to hear the Minister\u2019s reflection on our obligations, because Part 2, I think, is in direct contravention of that convention, as well. I know, for instance, that Simon Power, either in the lead-up to, or after his appearance before, the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, stated\u2014and I think this is a good quote, because I do agree\u2014\u201CIt\u2019s important to front up with our own situation so that we can credibly discuss the challenges facing other countries.\u201D There is an acknowledgment there by the Minister of Justice that in order to maintain our credibility on the international stage we not only need to be present and be ready to be scrutinised but also have to hold our own in this forum. We need to make sure that we maintain the bar set by the United Nations. In many other respects we do, but this is a fundamental failing. I think that it is slightly disingenuous to have said that we can credibly discuss the challenges facing other countries only if we front up with our own, and then not even discuss what we were debating at that time back in the New Zealand Parliament and in the Social Services Committee as part of the parliamentary process\u2014these fundamental changes made through the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI ask the Minister for Social Development and Employment whether she would not mind addressing the points I have raised around the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act and the impact of changes in that legislation, because it is reasonably detailed. The changes there mainly come through implication rather than direct reference, so I would like a little more clarity around those provisions. I also would like to know what discussions were had with the Minister of Justice and the Ministry of Justice on those provisions, because I think, quite rightly, that there have been concerns about the very swift broadening of powers around bodily samples and DNA testing in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022 data-id=\u00229796a4eebd6740dfbaf43ce0edd92b36\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229796a4eebd6740dfbaf43ce0edd92b36\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment):\u003C/span\u003E To be clear about Part 2 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill , clause 41 amends sections 8, 18(1), 23(1), and 24C of the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995. The amendments update the circumstances when children may be required or may consent to give bodily samples, in order to reflect the changes to the principal Act proposed by the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EClause 42 amends section 142A of the Criminal Justice Act 1985. The amendment relates to a child who is serving a sentence of imprisonment, whether that sentence was imposed before or after the commencement of this legislation. It ensures that, after the commencement of this legislation, the child may, while he or she still is a child, be detained under that sentence only in an approved residence as defined under the principal Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EThis part of the bill is very narrow. It applies directly to those matters. I would be interested to hear whether Labour will support this part. It did support the original Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill, and Part 2 merely brings the Act into line with the changes in this bill. Part 2 is a narrow part. We have debated the main part of the bill. I think the clauses in Part 2 are important additions to the bill that we must do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u0022171333995ccb48dcb0c9d38aa7b83f67\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022171333995ccb48dcb0c9d38aa7b83f67\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I thank the Minister for Social Development and Employment for her contribution, but I am afraid it did not actually address the issues that my colleague Jacinda Ardern had asked about with regard to her concerns around this part of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill. In particular, the Minister failed to address the concerns about the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which in my reading of Part 2 of this bill does cause New Zealand some grief in terms of its commitments in that regard. I have had the opportunity to contribute to this debate in the earlier parts of the Committee stage, and in the main I was very focused on whether the boot camp model was the right pathway to go down for our young people who are in trouble with the justice system and in trouble in the course of their lives, in particular thinking about the very good model, Te Hurihanga, which has been established in Hamilton, and which this Government is closing down. That seems to be a much better way to go in order to deal with these issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to Part 2 of this bill, I am interested in gaining some understanding from the Minister about what the implications are for clause 42, which amends the Criminal Justice Act, and amends it in a way that has children subject to our youth justice facilities. I am particularly keen to know what that means in terms of residential facilities when it comes to 12 and 13-year-olds. I have to say that I am interested from a personal perspective as well, because when I read this bill as a member of Parliament I also cannot help but read this as a mother. I cannot separate the two sometimes, and I think that is probably a good thing. That is why we have women in this Chamber, because it is important that we wear all of those hats when we are reading legislation. I am the mother of a 12-year-old. I read this part of the bill and wonder about the rights of my 12-year-old with regard to having compulsory samples taken. I tell members it is not something that I relish the idea of as a parent. What are the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e89ca30f8904b36b36466b7fba8a605\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s taking a cheek swab.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a406143d174447eb36410a028042caa\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Borrows seems to think that he has the answer to the anxiety that parents might have about the rights of children at the ages of 12 and 13 years. I am interested that at least Part 2 does call these 12 and 13-year-olds \u201Cchildren\u201D, because they are, and there are other parts of this bill that pretend otherwise. We are talking about children who are 12 and 13 years old. For example, if my son were in this position\u2014if he were accused of a crime\u2014would I be with him? Would there be a requirement for the parents to be informed? Would the parents need to give consent for bodily samples to be taken from a 12-year-old? Those are things that I think New Zealand parents will be contemplating as they hear this debate, because they are very important issues to consider. Certainly, being the mother of a 12-year-old, I do not believe that he would be in a position to make legal decisions about his rights in this regard. Those are the sorts of things that I would like to hear in a more succinct form from the Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe Minister stood up and read out perfectly well what we can all see in front of us. We can all see which sections of which acts will be amended, but what we are really interested in is what this means with regard to our international obligations; we want to know what discussions have been had with other Ministers with regard to this, and we want to know exactly what this means in terms of children and the way they are treated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI started by talking about residential facilities and that is where I want to end my contribution. For example, the Te Hurihanga facility in Hamilton is an 8-bed facility. I want to know whether 12-year-olds would be in a residential facility staying overnight with 24-year-olds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022 data-id=\u0022ed7f501dcbde4286b766676495db3e16\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ed7f501dcbde4286b766676495db3e16\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to take a short call on Part 2 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill, in order to reflect, as my colleagues have done, on the implications from our perspective of the major change that this bill brings forward: that is, the treatment of 12 to 13-year-olds. We are discussing children here. We know the Minister for Social Development and Employment has been very reluctant to use the word children when referring to 12 to 13-year-olds, but that is what they are. When we put them into a criminal jurisdiction like the Youth Court, then it has a whole series of implications.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EThis part identifies again some of the concerns Labour members have. We are discussing children who are 12 and 13 years of age, and who will be asked to provide bodily samples, I assume voluntarily. Once collected, the sample is kept. All the uses and abuses of those samples are possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272acaafa4d21454f8b7d55b989b39ebf\u0022\u003ETodd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: What abuses? Give us an example.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf9d8ac655464fa7bf5b619108cf96d6\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Mr McClay that the major one is that it will give a dog a bad name. When a 12-year-old does stray and eventually comes back to the fold, those samples are kept for a long time, and one does not know how those samples will be used or abused. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022264e3870067246e09b9f5feea634b4b5\u0022\u003ETodd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: It sounds like conspiracy theory.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a09648178264438b2f8b791d6d8f06f\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD\u003C/span\u003E: The member ought to be an advocate for 12-year-olds and protect their rights. This part does not do that, and this bill does not do that. Here is an example of what is likely to happen to those children: they will be exposed to this bodily samples regime. This part of the bill opens them up to it. Where are the protections for 12 and 13-year-olds? New Zealand will be in breach of international conventions. What discussions have there been around that? We have not heard any of those arguments. The Minister may want to take a call to give us those kinds of guarantees.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f4a44e1b622a4c98bbb2196bb39462ef\u0022\u003ETodd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: The information will be misused.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a64e126b926e453fb45a34f247a31da2\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Mr McClay that he knows that these issues were not discussed at any length in the Social Services Committee. It was taken for granted, but now when we come back and have a look at it in the totality of what this bill provides, we see we have a major glitch that ought to be addressed, and that ought to be talked about. What are the explanations we will provide for the responsibilities we have in terms of our United Nations obligations? They have not been reported, they have not been discussed, and they have not been identified. They were not discussed in the select committee, and here we are again with the risks of exposing 12 to13-year-olds. We are told that it is for a small number, but we do not know what the number will be under this regime. We believe that those children ought to have those protections, but the protections are not there at the moment. So what is the real purpose of this legislation? How will the Minister address our United Nations obligations to protect children? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EOne also wonders what other implications there are for the 12 to 13-year-olds who will be caught by the regime and by this legislation. What might they be? Which ones have been talked about? The present Minister in the chair, the Hon Judith Collins, might want to explain some of those. In the end, these are ethical questions, as well. They are ethical questions that accrue to this aspect of this bill, and they have not been answered. They have not been addressed. Minister Bennett, in the speeches she has given so far, has not been willing to engage in a philosophical or ethical justification for these provisions, but here is another opportunity for the Minister in the chair, and perhaps for other speakers on the other side of the Chamber, to address the question and convince us that the protections for children\u2014because that is what they are\u2014that they deserve and demand will be accorded. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EIndeed, those are the obligations we have, and we have given guarantees in our own child protection, as well as in the United Nations rules and conventions we have signed up to in New Zealand, that we need to address. I would like to hear some explanation about why this legislation is necessary, and how it really protects the needs of very young children. I look forward to those explanations. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00226100fe0bf0cd43a7b1136bb2004b1b13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226100fe0bf0cd43a7b1136bb2004b1b13\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of the Green Party to oppose Part 2 for many of the reasons that have been outlined by my Labour colleagues. I think that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is very relevant here, because the essence of that convention is that the rights and welfare of children come first. If we apply that in this situation to 12 and 13-year-olds, the imposition of a regime of DNA testing and bodily samples is not putting the rights of children first. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWe can look at this in perspective. It was not long ago that we did not have any DNA testing. When the select committee discussed the bill that Part 2 is amending, it was said quite clearly by a number of jurisdictions, and by the Privacy Commissioner, that taking bodily samples of people\u2019s DNA is particularly intrusive, much more so than is taking fingerprints or other forms of biometric testing. It is an intrusion on the privacy of the person. If we look at it in the context that this has just come in, then it is very intrusive. We have not had the taking of body samples in place for too long; I ask why we need it now for children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe Green Party opposed the original bill that effectively brought in compulsory bodily sample extraction. I ask why we now have to bring it right down to include children\u201412 and 13-year-olds. There is no argument for it to be brought to that level. A provision in the bill talks about suspects, and it should be borne in mind that we do not actually need to be charged to have a bodily sample taken, according to the original legislation that this bill is amending; one need just be a police suspect. The police have a couple of months before they can charge a person, or decide not to, after they have taken the bodily sample. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThen there is the question about whether a 12 or 13-year-old is able to give consent. When we are talking about 12 and 13-year-olds, are we really talking about consent? For example, a 12-year-old is bundled into the back of a police car and is taken to the station and asked whether he or she will consent to a body sample being taken. In any rational analysis, there is no consent there\u201499 percent of the time you do what the police say, and there might be a few implications that if you do not, there might be a few downsides for you and your family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0101f832be24a0499754b5518b74122\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is bringing the Chair into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2edfb6da60549a495c6a3b13f0897a1\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, Mr Chairman. I am talking about \u201Cyou\u201D in the generic sense, but I should not use the word. I think that is the problem with a lot of legislation in this House. We keep running down the track of having more and more restrictions on people\u2019s rights. Sure, people can argue that there might be an upside to it, and that there might be a really bad 12-year-old and that this particular provision will enable a bodily sample to be given. That person may at some point in the future be convicted, and that provision will be good. But if we put it in the balance of what is happening to children in this society\u2014the criminalisation of children\u2014and adding the extraction of bodily samples from them in essentially a forced way, then I ask which is the greater problem for society. Is it the occasional child who might get off when he or she should be convicted\u2014the one in one thousand or whatever\u2014or is it the intrusion that this measure will cause and the infringement on children\u2019s rights that is contrary to all our international commitments to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u002290dff54e3aac42c0a441607c21e6cd20\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002290dff54e3aac42c0a441607c21e6cd20\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will start off my call on Part 2 by foreshadowing two amendments that Labour will put forward. It is important to say that Labour has put forward these amendments to Part 2 based on previous rulings in the accident compensation legislation about where these matters need to be raised. The Chairperson previously ruled that expiry provisions must be within a part of the bill, not with the preliminary provisions, so we are following that ruling, and these amendments are to be inserted as a new clause in Part 2. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe two amendments are very different. The first amendment would mean that the entire Act expires by way of a sunset clause, and the second amendment would mean that only Part 2 of this legislation expires. I very much look forward to the ACT Party\u2019s support for these amendments, as the ACT Party has regularly called for legislation and regulations to have sunset clauses and expiry dates. In this instance we agree with those members, and we look forward to having a majority of the Committee in favour of these sunset clauses. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to Part 2, I urge the Minister in the chair, the Minister for Social Development and Employment, to answer some of the questions that are going unanswered in this debate. I would really appreciate getting some clarification over the compulsion in the taking of DNA samples from minors. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69000999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI have the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995 in front of me, which is the principal Act being amended by this part. A reading of the Act would imply that we can compulsorily take a sample from a 12 or 13-year-old in the case of murder or manslaughter, and my reading of the amendment that the Minister is putting forward in Part 2 is that that power will be extended to any indictable offence punishable by 14 years\u2019 imprisonment or more. I would like the Minister\u2019s clarification on that\u2014that what we are doing here is saying that a DNA sample can be taken compulsorily from a 12 or 13-year-old for any indictable offence punishable by 14 years\u2019 imprisonment or more. I do not think it is too much to ask for that clarification so that we know what we are passing here this evening. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThis is of particular interest to me, and I gave many speeches on previous legislation amending the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act, which this Government passed. That amending legislation extended the DNA database. The reason I did that was that although I am a great believer in DNA legislation\u2014I am a great believer in its potential not just for convicting the guilty but for freeing people who have been wrongly convicted of crime\u2014it does worry me that members of this Parliament do not seem to realise that although this technology has enormous potential, it also has enormous risk and restrictions in its ability. It is not foolproof by any stretch of the imagination. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EMembers of this Committee know how powerful DNA technology is. If 12 or 13-year-olds go to court and there is DNA evidence against them, it is very difficult to argue out of those charges. The fact is that all DNA evidence does is prove that someone\u2019s DNA was at the scene of a crime. That is all it proves. It is up to the rest of the evidence to prove why someone\u2019s DNA was there, that that person was there, and what that person was doing whilst there. There is an idea that, somehow, if someone\u2019s DNA is found at a crime scene, it means that person committed the crime. I find it worrying that Government members have made those claims in terms of this legislation and in previous DNA legislation that we have passed. They have called DNA testing a fingerprint. It is not a fingerprint. A fingerprint is an entire thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWhen we come to DNA testing, we test only a few loci\u2014something like 0.001 percent of someone\u2019s DNA is tested when a DNA sample is taken. Although it is incredibly accurate, it is not a fingerprint. If we are to be extending again the use and the powers of this technology, I want to hear\u2014and I am pleased the Minister of Justice has come to the Chamber\u2014that Government members understand and are prepared to articulate not just the potential but the limitations of this technology. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EAs my colleague Lianne Dalziel has pointed out time and time again, it is not just that it is difficult to exonerate someone if he or she is innocent but has DNA against them; it is sometimes hard to get a conviction if the person does not have DNA evidence against them. People believe, because they watch CSI, that DNA is always there, in every single case\u2014it is called the CSI effect amongst the science community. The belief is that if DNA is present, someone is guilty, and if it is not present, the person must be innocent. That is not true. With the greatest respect to the Minister in the chair, I say that when legislation like this extends the jurisdiction of this technology, I want to know that the Government understands those limitations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI would like the Minister to stand and say yes, categorically, this bill is about the compulsory taking of DNA samples from 12 and 13-year-olds for any indictable offence punishable by 14 years\u2019 or more imprisonment, and that has been extended from murder and manslaughter. That is actually why we have a Committee stage\u2014it is the one opportunity for Opposition MPs to put questions about legislation directly to a Minister and to have them answered, particularly on legislation that is of such importance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI sincerely hope, because my colleagues have told me that this question has not been answered, that the Minister is prepared to answer it and to clarify it, not just for members on this side of the Chamber but for the public of New Zealand, who want to know exactly what is being passed into law. I am very pleased to see that the Minister is seeking advice, and I hope we can get some clarification on this point so we can stop asking the same question. Until we get a response, I think it is very, very unfair of the Minister to just not answer our question and then move the closure motion, as the Government will inevitably try to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EPrevious speakers have said that we are talking about children here, and we are. These are 12 and 13-year-olds. I think anyone who has children, or anyone who was a 12 or 13-year-old, knows that we are talking about children. It is terrible when children do tragic and awful things. But I would also say that this legislation is about the taking of a DNA sample prior to someone being found guilty. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EA person is innocent until proven guilty in this country, and we have to remind ourselves of that when we are talking about extending the jurisdiction of this technology, which is very powerful but comes with enormous risks. When we hear tub-thumping and chest-beating speeches from Government members about how the Government is tough on crime and is cracking down on these terrible, awful tiny horrors and terrors, we have to remind ourselves that in this country a person is innocent until proven guilty. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EJust because someone has a DNA sample taken, it does not mean that he or she is guilty. Given the extension of these provisions to 12 and 13-year-olds who may well not have done anything wrong, I do not think it is too much to ask for the Minister in the chair to take a call and clarify for the Opposition members, and for the people of New Zealand, exactly what we are passing into law, because it is not clear. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI would also like the Minister, in her response to that question, to acknowledge that the Government, despite all the speeches that its members are giving, understands the limitations on this technology. I would like her to acknowledge that the Government will properly fund the Institute of Environmental Science and Research, which does the DNA testing through a contract with the police, and that it will train the police properly. In Victoria special squads had to be hired to forcibly take DNA samples from minors. They had to be trained in how to hold minors down in order to forcibly take a DNA sample. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI want the Minister to clarify that that may well be what we are talking about here. If it is, I ask whether training will take place so that we do not end up with endless complaints to the Independent Police Conduct Authority and endless litigation over what the police can and cannot do. The police need protection in this, as well. They need to know exactly what they can and cannot do in order to forcibly take a DNA sample\u2014because we are extending this provision well beyond where the current law is at right now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EBut, more important, is the question of whether the Institute of Environmental Science and Research will be properly funded not just for the cost of actually doing the extra DNA tests but for the administrative staff. The administrative staff receive the samples, log them in correctly, and continue the chain of custody that started with the police, and we need to ensure that we do not have any miscarriages of justice because of a lack of funding for the administrative functions that the institute carries out. This is not scaremongering; this has happened in other jurisdictions. In fact, this happened in New Zealand. A man was assaulted in Christchurch and he gave a DNA sample. He was then was charged with murder. But his alibi was that he was in Christchurch being assaulted at the time of the murder, so he could not possibly have done it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022 data-id=\u0022cd46836f229e4f1891013e74a10abdc7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cd46836f229e4f1891013e74a10abdc7\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour\u2014Christchurch East):\u003C/span\u003E I heard the Minister in the chair, the Hon Paula Bennett, minimise the reality of Part 2 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill by saying it follows on from a part that we have been debating at some length. I do not think that is a fair and reasonable response from the Minister. In fact, it sounded as though she was trying to put off having to respond to the questions that have been put to her, and was trying to encourage the Chair, perhaps, to close the debate on a significant part of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003ENobody can ignore the fact that this bill has major consequences for our children. I still cannot hear the Minister use the word \u201Cchildren\u201D. The reason that she cannot use that word is that she finds it really difficult to accept the fact that that is what the law she is responsible for administering says. She is responsible for administering the protection of our children. She has obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and she is completely ignoring them. That Minister has not responded to a single question that I asked the last time that we were debating this issue, that Jacinda Ardern asked earlier, and that Rajen Prasad and now Moana Mackey have asked. All of us have asked a series of questions around the implications of this legislation for New Zealand\u2019s standing in front of the United Nations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe Minister of Justice is in the Chamber. He has been in front of the United Nations, responding on our human rights standing. This bill was not even mentioned then, even though it was before the House when he appeared in front of the UN. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bbc8881f82a423a8cf6a3f68b264df4\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: What?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f3304325fe1491dad4af0bbd3e9a087\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: No, it was not even mentioned, yet it was before the House at the time. I want to know what the Minister\u2019s advice has been from her officials about what New Zealand\u2019s standing with the United Nations will be when this bill is passed into law. I think that she has had advice that this legislation breaches the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. It seriously challenges that convention, not only in Part 1 but especially in Part 2, where we are dealing with compulsory DNA testing. I think the Minister should respond to that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E I have had feedback on this debate. I do not often have people walking up to me at functions\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0ee9006e4c1486c9e1cbed1e797a06c\u0022\u003EHon Simon Power\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s OK.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfd818fcc3994b2bb472c816855efea2\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: No, they come up to me at functions\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202bd6fef177c48efad16608aba65a6d0\u0022\u003EHon Simon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, generally speaking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236b7f35bb9544cdbad3d8fb3717fff79\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: Generally speaking. But they do not often come up to me and say they thought I gave a really good speech in Parliament this week. I was surprised at that. I keep forgetting that we have Parliament TV now, and people channel hop and stop when they see something interesting. I asked one guy which speech he was referring to, because I had given quite a few speeches last week. He said it was the one about children and who was responsible for them. I had talked about the rights of the child to be protected from a whole lot of adverse effects, and had said that responsibility lay with their parents, their family, and also the wider community. I think that was said in response to some ridiculous comments from the ACT member David Garrett, who had been particularly repulsive in his comments about how young offenders were not children any more, because of the acts that they have committed. He was not prepared to look at the circumstances of that offending: the deprivation of those children, and, indeed, the damage that had been done to them in the environments in which they had grown up. He did not mind that; he did not seem to care about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe person who approached me fortunately turned out to be a constituent of mine. He was a long way away from the electorate, but I was very pleased to find out that my constituent thought that I had given a good speech. He said that while I was talking, he started to think about his son, who is 11\u00BD years old. He suddenly realised that Parliament was debating the lowering of the age to one where his son, a child, would in 6 months\u2019 time have criminal responsibility for offences other than murder and manslaughter. Again, I think people dwell on murder and manslaughter, but the law already allows for criminal responsibility to sit at that level for murder and manslaughter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe other question that my constituent raised with me, and to which the Minister did not respond, was the question of who had murdered Michael Choy. The general public seems to believe that the person who took Michael Choy\u2019s life was an individual called Bailey Junior Kurariki. But he was found guilty of manslaughter, along with Phillip Kaukasi, Riki R\u0101pira, and Joe Kaukasi. Those who actually took his life were Alexander Tokorua Peihopa and Whatarangi R\u0101wiri. Nobody in the House has ever heard of those other people. Why was Bailey Junior Kurariki held up to the public as the face of the youngest killer that this country has ever had? It was because of his age. The Minister wants to open up to that kind of pressure every other 12 and 13-year-old who falls off the track and ends up in that situation in relation to a wider range of offences. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003ENobody is justifying what those children do. No one justifies what Bailey Junior Kurariki did in conjunction with his friends, who, I have to say, were older than him, and possibly led him astray. He was 12 years old when that offence happened. He rang the pizza place, and that was why the pizza was delivered to that house. He opened the door when the pizza arrived, but he has become this country\u2019s entire focus as the individual who killed Michael Choy. It was not Bailey Junior Kurariki who killed Michael Choy, but he was involved in that offence. I think what the Minister has completely lost sight of is that in Part 2 we have the situation where DNA testing becomes part of the total package that follows a young person throughout the rest of his or her life. So in the case of Bailey Junior Kurariki, he would not only have that following him for the rest of his life; he has the outcome of the media\u2014judge and jury, as they are\u2014essentially finding him guilty of the most heinous offence that one could imagine. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI think that the Minister has not taken responsibility for ensuring that New Zealand is able to maintain its status with regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is amazing that the Minister of Justice has moved an amendment in a bill that he introduced only a week ago, to allow for a change to our adoption laws so that, in fact, we can actually sign up to one of the convention provisions that we have not been able to sign up to until now. I think that the Minister Paula Bennett does New Zealand a great disservice, first, by ignoring the fact that we are talking in this debate about children, and, second, by minimising the issue with regard to DNA testing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe Minister can play on her BlackBerry as much as she likes, but it is not really fair that she is not participating in the debate. She is simply playing on her BlackBerry as she sits at the Table. I would have thought that is probably out of order, but there you go. That Minister is not prepared to participate in the debate in a reasonable way, and she misses the ultimate point, which is that she has an obligation to ensure that New Zealand is always able to provide for its obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Other Ministers stand in front of the United Nations and talk about our commitment to human rights, yet on this particular issue this Minister is prepared to stand back and say it is OK to hold children to account in the Youth Court for their actions, regardless of all of the reasons that might have brought them there, regardless of the damage that has occurred from their upbringing, and regardless of the lack of support that they have had from their family and their community. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThese offenders are children. Part 2 is just as important as Part 1. Members on this side of the Chamber will continue to debate the importance of Part 2 until the Minister takes some responsibility and gets up to explain why she thinks it is OK that mandatory DNA testing is applicable to 12 and 13-year-olds\u2014children\u2014under the legislation that she is obliged to oversee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022 data-id=\u0022adf4bb35aca248adaba20abae05b070c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022adf4bb35aca248adaba20abae05b070c\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Youth Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E Just in response to Lianne Dalziel, I will quickly say that some of the offences we are talking about are rape, arson, wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, and aggravated robbery. I take members back to some of the well-known and very unfortunate criminals whose string of absolutely dreadful crimes have left victims behind them, and who have caused a lot of distress, and say that if they could have had DNA samples taken from those criminals back when they were first offending, would they not have done that? Would they not have taken DNA samples then, to try to prevent those unfortunate and distressing future crimes that have resulted in people being extremely hurt? We are not talking about the light stuff; we are not talking about indictable offences. I know that those questions have been asked. We are talking about extreme and distressing crimes that leave victims behind them. I say that if we could have taken samples then, we would have. We should give the police that sort of power and that sort of control. I end by saying that, yes, there was a moment when I was on my BlackBerry. The member mentioned before that someone who had seen her on TV had commented about what a good speech she had given. I got a message that said it was appalling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022 data-id=\u0022ff8e59f59e774a2ba76c646742b7a38b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ff8e59f59e774a2ba76c646742b7a38b\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E It is interesting, I mentioned in my maiden speech something that Harry Holland used to always ask. He was one of the early leaders of the Labour Party, and his first test was to ask: is it right for the people of New Zealand? I was speaking at a Rotary club on Monday this week. Rotary has its four principles, as well, and they are very much aligned with the Labour Party principles. The No. 1 principle is whether it is right for the people of New Zealand. If Harry Holland thought that it was right for the people of New Zealand, then the Labour Party would move forward, start the policy process, and put it into place. I look at this bill with regard to 12 and 13-year-olds and I ask: is this right? It fails the fundamental test. It fails under any test. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI will tell members a story. I heard an interview with a woman called Celia Lashlie. I think we all know of her. She is a prison reformer. She said she thought that of all the people she had ever met in the prison system, only six of them could not be reformed. That woman had met many evil buggers in the prison system, but she had met only six who could not be rehabilitated. On a plane down from Auckland one time, I was sitting next to Sian Elias. I mentioned to her what Celia Lashlie had said, and I asked what her views on this issue were. This was after the honourable Minister Simon Power had said that Sian Elias was not in a position to comment on judicial matters, being the Chief Justice, and what would she know about judicial matters, anyway? I mentioned Celia Lashlie\u2019s comment to Sian Elias, and asked what her view was on that. She said she concurred with it. She thought that very, very few people who entered our judicial system could not be rehabilitated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis is about language. Politics is about language, messaging is about language. If we tell a 12 or 13-year-old that he or she is a criminal, then we have set that child on a path to jail. That is not what is necessary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI read the Hawke\u2019s Bay Today, I read the papers. There have been a lot of assaults and there has been a lot of crime. Let us face facts: we are all tough on crime, and we want to be tough on crime. Crime is a scourge of our society, but these are crimes committed by people over the age of 18 or 21 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EAs MPs we have all been to intermediate schools and seen 12 and 13-year-olds running around the fields, and that is where they should be. They should be kicking around rugby balls, throwing softballs around, and throwing netballs through hoops. These are not criminals. If we label them as criminals, then we are labelling them for the rest of their lives. This comes back to national standards and to why all the top academics are against national standards. If we label a kid a failure, then that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. If we label a 12 or 13-year-old a criminal, that will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is not about that; it is about mentoring. It astounds me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EMy colleague Moana Mackey said that the police will run into a whole lot of complaints about this legislation, but I will tell members why they will not. I say this with all due respect to my colleague, who is a very articulate speaker and who knows what she is talking about because science and technology are her background. The police will not run into a whole lot of complaints about this, because 12 and 13-year-olds simply do not know their rights. If a policeman comes along to a 12 or 13-year-old, that child will not complain, because at that age children hardly know which foot to put each shoe on. We are talking about children, for God\u2019s sake. We are not talking about criminals; we are talking about children. Why can members opposite not say that they are children?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cec32e9a41cd400b87d7fac38628488f\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, for goodness\u2019 sake!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221a0a616d88e4e8f81facac11fc387c4\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: I ask when Sandra Goudie last visited an intermediate school. There are kids running around in shorts, with bare feet, kicking rugby balls. It astounds me that we want to label these children as criminals. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EOne of the things we must address is what the cause of this is. It is poverty. For example, in Hawke\u2019s Bay, 70 percent of the people earn under $40,000. Seventy percent of the people in Hawke\u2019s Bay got no tax cut in that Government\u2019s reforms, and those people will be screwed when this Government increases GST to 15 percent. It is as if Government members do not even care. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EWhere is the caring society that we all came from? Where is the community spirit? It has disappeared, and this is just one further step in eroding the community spirit that this party was born to believe in. I would like to think that the vast majority of New Zealanders believe in community spirit. But Government members want to take 12 and 13-year-olds away. We are not talking about people, we are talking about children. If you take DNA from these guys, then you are labelling them for life. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a317a38809f346ffb14c50840dca3a8e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: The member must not include me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225cdd774096d84199bf683170aa9e6fbd\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, Mr Chairperson, you are not at all\u2014I know that you are a decent\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbfc832552784a37b89b339cd591c113\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d01b0b08e28444da41325d9213d9ee8\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, Mr Chairperson. This Government is removing any vestige of community. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EWhat I think really needs addressing in this House\u2014and the Labour Party works very hard to address this\u2014is what the causes of poverty are. Why do we have 12 and 13-year-olds committing crimes that in the past we just did not see occurring? I will tell members what it is: it is the breakdown that is happening in the community. People are working at second and third jobs simply to put food on the table, to put petrol in the car, to put clothes on the children, and to buy textbooks. National members want to give tax cuts to those earning over $70,000\u2014and we are talking about only 8 percent of the population\u2014and to make 75 percent of the population pay more in GST. We all know that is the case. Seventy-five percent of the people in this country earn under $40,000. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bd56c5f05124f93a7a8a7566114b9a1\u0022\u003EChester Borrows\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. We are debating Part 2, which amends the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act and the Criminal Justice Act. The member has talked about national standards, GST, tax cuts, and the causes of poverty, and we have had sweet Fanny Adams about Part 2. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e89f199fdc1a4a33873a6050c85b0acd\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member himself became a little bit elaborate in his explanation. Members know that relevance is one of the issues I consider before taking the closure motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022845e6bca9fc54319b00b4d6538c9d2df\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: With regard to DNA testing, I see taking DNA from 12 and 13-year-olds as being a breach of human rights. These are members of our society who do not have any understanding of their rights. These are members of our society who should be looked after and covered by our society, yet by taking their DNA we are in effect putting them on a database and criminalising them for life. It will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EAs Moana Mackey mentioned, a whole lot unintended consequences will come from this. The Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, or the Institute of Environmental Science and Research Ltd, or whatever it is called these days\u2014it is being restructured because it now has to have a profit motive\u2014will probably be user-pays, and GST will be charged on top of that, and we all know that it is going up to 15 percent, to hurt the most affected. No only are we seeing here an increased cost to society in relation to marginalising and criminalising the most vulnerable in our society but also we are making the Institute of Environmental Science and Research and the police undertake procedures that, in effect, they know are a waste of time. They know that this will not help society, that it is not about productivity, and that it is not about protecting society. It is pure and utter politics. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI know that if the vast majority of New Zealanders looked into their hearts and asked whether they wanted to criminalise 12 and 13-year-olds, whether they wanted to take their DNA, and whether they wanted to violate the human rights of 12 and 13-year-olds by forcing them to give swabs, and asked whether that is what they signed up for, whether it is what they voted for, and whether it is the sort of society they want or the sort of country they want to live in, then the answer to every single question would be no. These are children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EWe are seeing the breakdown of our communities. We talk about a Government that is inclusive, that wants economic development, yet here we have legislation in front of us that, in effect, is marginalising those who are the most vulnerable when, in fact, we should be picking them up and giving them opportunities. We should be providing them with aspiration. It is easy to talk about aspiration as we beat them down, as we heap all this stuff on top of them and say: \u201CYou cannot achieve because you are a criminal.\u201D It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, and I for one am very proud to be part of this party, which stands up for the rights of children\u2014who stands up for 12-year-olds. They are not even in their teens, for goodness\u2019 sake. The 12-year-olds whom I know are, without a doubt, children, yet this Government wants to take DNA samples from them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EWe talked about CSI. I like CSI, it is a great programme, but never in any of the CSI programmes that I have watched has there been a 12-year-old who has had a mouth swab, on whom all these tests have been run, and who has been put in jail. Even the guys on TV who make programmes to appeal to the vast majority know that taking DNA from 12 and 13-year-olds is just not right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis bill represents everything that is wrong. It fails the fundamental test that we ask ourselves every day as parliamentarians: is this right for the people of New Zealand? No, it is not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u00226cbb9a4d626640f39f8ed46369f26942\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226cbb9a4d626640f39f8ed46369f26942\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002281b5da61b3f540328768a0f2a0e2e8d1\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001053\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jacinda Ardern to clause 41 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001054\u0022\u003Eto omit this clause.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b3b07b5a3d3d466dad1b850cb1f2fd3f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u0022120b22cbf7f8403da994b89b75d44068\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022120b22cbf7f8403da994b89b75d44068\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: We come to a number of amendments in the name of three different members seeking to include an expiry provision in the bill. In order to deal with these amendments, I think a precedent has been set earlier in the day, and in line with that particular precedent I wish to test the will of the Committee as to whether it wants to accept these amendments. I propose to put the question on the two extreme amendments, and on one amendment in the middle, in order to test it. I think that because proposed dates are so far apart, we need some middle ground as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jacinda Ardern to Part 2 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003Eto add the following new clause:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E43A\tExpiry\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EThis Act expires with the close of 31 July 2010.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022584f28bdf26040f9933917859d4475e3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001060\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jacinda Ardern to Part 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001061\u0022\u003Eto add the following new clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001062\u0022\u003E43A\tExpiry\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001063\u0022\u003EThis Act expires with the close of 22 October 2025.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002286558cc9e667441885c46765c8015387\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001064\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jacinda Ardern to Part 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001065\u0022\u003Eto add the following new clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001066\u0022\u003E43A\tExpiry\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001067\u0022\u003EThis Act expires with the close of 31 July 2042.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002249f2bd2759a14cdea84bbd3f193fbc5f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u00224d7223f930464ffc92e9c123dbd0a1f1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d7223f930464ffc92e9c123dbd0a1f1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: The Committee has had an opportunity to express its will on a variety of expiry provisions. Therefore, I rule out all other amendments adding expiry clauses after clause 43. We will now have a similar arrangement with regard to adding a new clause 44A, which is a sunset provision. I wish to begin by putting the question on the amendment with the earliest expiry date that I can find, in the name of Grant Robertson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Grant Robertson to Part 2 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003Eto add the following new clause:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E44A\tExpiry\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003EThis Part expires with the close of 19 September 2011.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022bd9158c4034c4066b1d0e8d798caf161\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001073\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Grant Robertson to Part 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001074\u0022\u003Eto add the following new clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001075\u0022\u003E44A\tExpiry\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001076\u0022\u003EThis Part expires with the close of 1 October 2033.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002242e2243329384f8bbdc00df508a63e74\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001077\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Grant Robertson to Part 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001078\u0022\u003Eto add the following new clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001079\u0022\u003E44A\tExpiry\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001080\u0022\u003EThis Part expires with the close of 23 September 2093.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00220c164437376b47c78bf2e2a1dd30cf02\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9bc07dba1ba45b7ad50268fd1f05c23\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: With the House in Committee expressing no desire to amend the bill by adding an expiry clause in a new clause 44A, I rule out all other similar amendments as being out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00228c0e373a9d3b4e7da2195eca2171bd7f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002236fe1823eb234c5880eae57ec382066a\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022 data-id=\u002201ab96793c344e3fafd4fee355920ba8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002201ab96793c344e3fafd4fee355920ba8\u0022\u003EJACINDA ARDERN (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to rise to kick off the debate on the clauses of the bill concerning the title, commencement, and principal amendments to the Act. I will start with the title of the bill. I think this actually comes to the core of the issue. The bill is titled the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill. Critically, there we are cross-referencing the primary legislation that this bill amends, and that is obviously the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act. We heard time and time again in this Chamber and also at select committee that this bill would fundamentally change the core and the principles of that primary legislation. I think to even claim that we are remaining in the realms of the core values of that legislation is actually quite misleading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003ESo I am proposing that we change the title of this bill. Perhaps we could change it to the \u201CMost Fundamental Change Since the Inception of the Children, Young Persons, and their Families Act Amendment Bill\u201D. Just to prove my point, I go back to that core legislation and those founding principles, because I think, had we done that at the beginning, that may have better informed the debate. Part 4 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 sets out under section 208 the guiding principles for our youth justice system. I think it is worth going over some of those. Section 208(a) states \u201Cthe principle that, unless the public interest requires otherwise, criminal proceedings should not be instituted against a child or young person if there is an alternative means of dealing with the matter:\u201D. That is an interesting point, the fact that it makes the reference \u201Cthe public interest requires\u201D. I ask who the arbiter is of whether the public interest is being served by having a 12 or 13-year-old being moved to, and dealt with by, a Youth Court. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI offer to the Committee the idea that we already have enough flexibility within our judicial processes and procedures in our youth justice system for that test of public interest to be made at that level. To arbitrarily move 12 and 13-year-olds into the Youth Court removes that discretion and public interest test as it sits in the primary legislation. I think section 208(c) is also worth reflecting on together as we go through the final part of the Committee stage. Again, it comes to the core issue. It states: \u201Cthe principle that any measures for dealing with offending by children or young persons should be designed\u2014(i) to strengthen the family, whanau, hapu, iwi, and family group of the child or young person concerned; and (ii) to foster the ability of families, whanau, hapu, iwi, and family groups to develop their own means of dealing with offending by their children and young persons:\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EThis Act puts the family at the core. It says that if we are dealing with children in particular and they are offending at the level that the Minister claims we are trying to target, there must be care and protection issues in that young child\u2019s home. The Act explicitly states that a core principle is that that family, that wh\u0101nau, that hap\u016B, that iwi should be a part of dealing with that young person\u2019s or child\u2019s behaviour. We are removing that through this change. We are taking the family out of the equation. When we move a child or a young person into the Youth Court, we essentially fly in the face of this principle within the core primary legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI argue that we would be within our rights to look at the title of this bill and say that it is misleading, and to say instead that we should pick up on the point made by Judge Andrew Becroft when he said that this is the most fundamental change to the primary Act since its inception. Also at the core of this primary legislation is the idea that, essentially, our youth justice system, unless the public interest decides otherwise, should be diversionary and that criminal proceedings should, where possible, be limited in their usage for children and young people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI do have some other proposals for other names that we could use for the bill. I want to be able to offer those to the Committee. I think we can see that this bill contradicts some of those core principles. Perhaps, if we go a little further into those core principles, we see that age becomes an issue as well. In section 208 it states \u201C(e) the principle that a child\u2019s or young person\u2019s age is a mitigating factor in determining\u2014(i) whether or not to impose sanctions in respect of offending by a child or young person; and (ii) the nature of any such sanctions:\u201D. Again, we have a principle here that we are undermining with this legislation. Perhaps then this bill should be renamed the \u201CRemoval of Any Discretion to Test the Public Interest as Set Out in the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 Amendment Bill\u201D. It is not too snappy, I acknowledge.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d93b2c924ae43bba7c51c246a7dea3e\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: A bit clumsy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba45b50f60cd47c2b8f17a8a284c46f4\u0022\u003EJACINDA ARDERN\u003C/span\u003E: It is a bit clumsy, but I think it points that we are fundamentally undermining what was ground-breaking legislation at the time that it was introduced. I want to go back to that point, because it is internationally recognised that our legislation is unique; it was well ahead of its time when it was introduced, and still remains at the head of its game. But the changes that we are seeing here today undermine that and contravene our requirements under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. So, perhaps again, a better title for this bill would be the \u201CContradiction of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Amendment Bill\u201D. That is at the core of things as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI hear members on the other side of the House who are talking about the victims, and I will come back to that because they are specifically mentioned as part of the core principles of the Act as well. They are not mutually exclusive. That is why the public interest test is in there. We do acknowledge that we do have some serious offending amongst our children and our young people. But we could not size that in the Social Services Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208ae0b3bd7814cdb98e4bdec734d1079\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, she\u2019s saying that we do have some problems of offending. Oh my goodness!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea6ec86670404ca49763bf3d3791829b\u0022\u003EJACINDA ARDERN\u003C/span\u003E: I will never in this Chamber admit, I say to Ms Goudie, that she has a point. I am sorry; I will not admit that in this Chamber ever. I do not believe that she has taken into account the far-reaching effects of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EAgain, up front, at the very beginning of the core legislation in the first schedule, it talks about the fact that this an Act to reform the law relating to children and young persons who are in need of care or protection or offend against the law. It states right up front at the very beginning of the legislation what the core principles of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Family Act are, and I do believe this amendment bill flies in the face of those principles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003ESo why are we doing it? I want to come back to this in my third reading speech, because it is a more appropriate place to discuss that issue, but I contend that this is actually about shifting criminal responsibility. It has been tried before in this House and it has failed. It has been tried by other members who are not now part of the Government, but were from a party long past, New Zealand First. It tried to shift criminal responsibility in New Zealand. It was much more overt about it, though. I believe that although this bill may not be as overt as that attempt, this is taking us down a similar track. So perhaps this legislation should be retitled the \u201CShift In Criminal Responsibility Bill\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI thank members, though, for their contributions to the debate. I do hope my other colleagues take the opportunity to share their view on what would be a more accurate depiction of what this bill is doing to our youth justice system. As I have already stated, and as stated by Andrew Becroft, who is a much wiser person on the issues of youth justice than I, this is a fundamental shift and it cannot and should not happen in this Parliament without a robust debate first. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022 data-id=\u0022fd361c97524742c9806becd795d2f8b9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fd361c97524742c9806becd795d2f8b9\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS (National\u2014Whanganui):\u003C/span\u003E At this stage of the debate on the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill, it is interesting to recollect a little where we have travelled, the number of people who have spoken, and the points they have made in this part of the Committee stage, which allows us to take a view over the whole bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EI will make two or three points. The first point is that during the select committee process the Labour members prepared a three-page, fairly extensive minority report, but missing from that report was any talk about DNA. It has been quite interesting to see the debate we have had in respect of the conflict those members seem to find between natural justice and the Bill of Rights, and the taking of DNA samples. In an earlier speech we heard that apparently 12 and 13-year-old children would be held down to have a DNA sample taken from them. The DNA sample is actually taken by the young person taking what we know as a Q-tip, rubbing it on the inside of his or her cheek, and putting it into a plastic bag. The DNA sample is not taken by way of a burly policeman holding down the 12 or 13-year-old. It is important for the people who are listening and making an assessment on the validity of the speeches in the Committee stage to know that fact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EAnother point was made about 12 and 13-year-olds being children. Of course, under this Act and the Crimes Act \u201Cchild\u201D is defined as somebody under the age of 14. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ad15f36754745e99c9464bff8ffa187\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022137ac256529747788971f1f36857b38a\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS\u003C/span\u003E: So by this definition under the Crimes Act, 12 and 13-year-olds are children.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229dc1ba5676fc4117a031ae87a357c1fd\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202254e321bfa44a09009fd6365530ea3\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS\u003C/span\u003E: On their 14th birthday they become \u201Cyoung persons\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022725acf064eff47b1bb767d9492befe77\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8b595327aed4a41a875ac1f7cb618c2\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS\u003C/span\u003E: On their 17th birthday they become \u201Cadults\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ccc2dfa3b644cb7954b4010ce9ca6d4\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: That should be 18, as you know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cba41b1337a41dbba54ca587e8cdb90\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS\u003C/span\u003E: We do not hear any disagreement from members on the other side of the Chamber in relation to when children become young persons, but we hear disagreement about when they become adults. Those members have a problem with people becoming adults when they are 17. But that is the definition we are dealing with in relation to the Crimes Act and the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EIt is important, too, to restate the point the Minister for Social Development and Employment made in respect of the offences for which DNA will be taken from 12 and 13-year-olds. These are crimes that are punishable by 14 years\u2019 imprisonment or more. We are talking, for instance, of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The Hon Lianne Dalziel has spoken on numerous occasions about a tragic murder that involved half a dozen young people, the youngest aged 12. If we think about that situation, we see that if the victim of that attack, Michael Choy, had not died, then the 12-year-old offender\u2014who rang the pizza place to have the pizza delivered, opened the door to let the victim into the house, but apparently did not wield any implement that actually brought about the murder\u2014could not have been charged with anything. He may have appeared as part of a care and protection process through the Family Court and but would not have been charged, and a DNA sample could not be taken in any event whatsoever. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EThe Minister quite ably made the point that, knowing the offending that went on by some of our most notorious offenders\u2014like Joseph Thompson, Malcolm Rewa, and Graeme Burton\u2014if we had the opportunity to secure a cheek swab that held the DNA of any of those three offenders, with them having committed a crime punishable by 14 years\u2019 imprisonment or more, why would we not take it? Why would we not take the opportunity to prevent, for instance, the two of those offenders who went on to have at least 100 more victims in respect of rapes in people\u2019s own homes? If, for instance, we had their DNA profile on record, then as soon as they had left a bodily secretion of any kind they could have been identified, and that may well have prevented the crimes against those 100 or so victims. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EI believe very strongly that aligning this legislation with the DNA sampling legislation is a very real step. The DNA sampling legislation will prevent more victims than any other legislation this House is ever likely to pass. Aligning this Act in order to include 12 and 13-year-old offenders who have committed crimes of that magnitude is something that not even Harry Holland would have disagreed with, bearing in mind the way we treated 10, 12, 13 and 14-year-old offenders in Harry Holland\u2019s day. I think it is important to try to take some of the emotion out of this debate and just look at it in real terms. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EAnother point that has been made time and time again regards the initial debate we had from fairly high-profile people within the sector who were anti the legislation, especially in respect of 12 and 13-year-olds. We have heard Judge Andrew Becroft quoted on many, many occasions. The reason, of course, is that he has huge credibility within the sector. It is interesting to note, though, that when he appeared before the Social Services Committee initially\u2014he appeared about three times\u2014his concern was that 12 and 13-year-olds who offend on this level, and would therefore appear before the Youth Court under this legislation, are actually few. But we know that their offending is very sophisticated and very violent, and we are now seeing a new trend that involves young women as well as young men. He argued that if we really wanted to help the situation, we needed to streamline the process of moving young people through the court system that involves 12 and 13-year-olds. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EWe responded to that suggestion and he actually was complimentary about the changes that were made. For instance, we allowed the process to move quickly so that 12 and 13-year-old prolific offenders whom the police bring before the court system can appear before the Youth Court quickly so that they can have curfews, they can have prohibitions on associations with people, and they can be banned from areas of high-level offending. We can get them on to what in an adult court are called bail conditions and in the Youth Court are called adjournment conditions\u2014even if they then go back and appear before the Family Court. When Judge Andrew Becroft came back before the committee after the changes had been made, he commented that he did not have a heck of a lot of problem with this, because his suggestion was to streamline it, and that is exactly where it went. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EWhen he returned again to the committee, at that stage some more flesh had been put on the bones of the military-style activity camps\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240ce78c15601492e989b53bae473d92a\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: Without legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e751ac73cf9943f2a0b51da4ce6ac071\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and the Government had started a pilot course. We did not need legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226fc4c6306e50400599c607785905cf21\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: You don\u2019t need it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227332313fdbca42288bb215a328efc635\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. Just remember that the court could do it only with the consent of the young person who was appearing\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273604b6228c44a9b9d338ab3f01d31f3\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de418a82d5ec4b7aaa9953b6eb719420\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and we are changing that. Labour agrees with that change, so let us not kick it around too much. When Judge Becroft came back before the select committee and found out what was being offered in terms of programmes while people were attending these military-style activity camps, he did not refer to them as boot camps; he did not align them with the corrective training that was going on at that time. The members who were present will recall\u2014actually, not a lot of members opposite heard him, but I am sure that Ms Ardern will recall it\u2014that when he came back, and when the programmes that went along with military-style activity camps were explained, as they were being run at that time, he did not refer to them as boot camps. In fact, in a direct response to a question from me he said that they were completely different from the boot camps that had been commented on within the media and by commentators reported in the media. He said he agreed with the programmes that were being offered in the military-style activity camps, and he agreed that the style of camp that we were running\u2014and the supervision with activity, which is now part of military-style activity camps\u2014was actually having the best results. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2978d373c8f4cc58d68e0488a04b3c4\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf090bc949694986b5bc9586173f2f97\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS\u003C/span\u003E: That is what he said. I am pleased to stand here today, because a number of us have worked on this legislation for a long time. In Opposition the Hon Anne Tolley and I spent a lot of time looking at the youth justice area, visiting a number of providers around the country, and working on the youth justice discussion paper that was the forerunner of this bill. Along with the other members of the law and order caucus committee of the last National Opposition, I am very proud of this legislation. We believe that people will be safer and young people will be dealt with very well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022 data-id=\u002268e63a92f0454e5f9da16dd106376f68\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002268e63a92f0454e5f9da16dd106376f68\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour\u2014Christchurch East):\u003C/span\u003E I enjoy the opportunity to follow the member, because I consider that his contribution, unlike the Minister\u2019s, was intelligent and reasoned, and I feel that he went through the issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6d37d79b1f84263aa323d1582c865b9\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s true. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221612971e7c3b43c28fae5d10148877cf\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: I do not think the member was listening to the Minister in the chair, the Hon Paula Bennett, when she gave a response to a very serious issue that was raised with me. A constituent\u2014and I did not know he was a constituent when he came up to me\u2014said that I had given a good speech because it had made him think about how this legislation will affect his 11\u00BD-year-old son. He looked at his 11\u00BD-year-old son and said: \u201CAt 12, this child would be subject to the jurisdiction of the Youth Court.\u201D It made him think. The Minister stood up and said, in response to the questions that I had asked, that she had been rung by people who said that I had given a bad speech. Well, frankly, I do not care what anyone else says about the quality of my speech. I am interested in the issues that the previous speaker raised. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI think that the previous speaker nailed it when he isolated the differences between Labour and National on this legislation. Nobody has mentioned this, and the Minister continues to refuse to do this in her incapacity to deal with the fact that these are children we are talking about. Does anyone in his or her right mind\u2014and I hope Chester Borrows takes some further calls on this bill\u2014seriously think that these children end up committing these terrible offences in isolation from the environment within which they live? Does anyone think that? Does anyone seriously think that the lives of these children have somehow been perfect and all of a sudden they go out and commit a horrendous crime, such as intentionally wounding with intent to injure? That is one of the offences we have. Does that happen in isolation of the family or the parents? Does that happen in isolation from a community, or from the wh\u0101nau, iwi, or hap\u016B? Does it happen all by itself?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022902dac483f37420bb4bcdc7570b89549\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8ac0d2a9cdd4fcca135ea1a9545925a\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: No, it does not, and even the ACT member agrees with me on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EIn 1989 New Zealand created a world-leading mechanism for addressing some of these most serious issues. In fact, there is an element of what we know now that would make me want to rewrite the opening words of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act. It states: \u201CAn Act to reform the law relating to children and young persons who are in need of care or protection or who offend against the law.\u201D I think all of the children who offend against the law have care and protection issues. Not all of those with care and protection issues end up as offenders, but there is a connection. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI remember that when I first became a member of Parliament, a number of issues arose around the practice of having youth justice facilities on the same site as the care and protection units. The member opposite will recall those facilities in Christchurch. There were serious issues, because under the law they cannot mix. The irony that the social workers and the managers of those centres talked to me about was that it was crazy; they are the same children. They come in as care and protection cases, and then come back as offenders under the youth justice provisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe connections between care and protection and youth justice cannot be minimised, and that is what has happened with this debate. The previous speaker did not even mention the fact that these children have a right under our law to have the care and protection of their families, their parents, and their communities. What has happened is terribly wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003ELet us look at some of the care and protection issues: whether the child or young person is being, or is likely to be, harmed\u2014physically, emotionally, or sexually\u2014ill-treated, abused, or seriously deprived; or whether his or her development, or physical or mental or emotional well-being, is being, or is likely to be, impaired or neglected. All of those issues lie behind these children. They do not end up being offenders simply because they have grown up to be offenders. There are issues that lie behind them and they are always, every time, about care and protection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022 data-id=\u0022e16dbca42d5c42e189e7918e8c772027\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e16dbca42d5c42e189e7918e8c772027\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment):\u003C/span\u003E I want to take members back to the title of this bill, which I think is entirely appropriate: the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill. It covers this legislation incredibly well. The bill states that only those children who commit absolutely terrible, heinous crimes will be seen in the Youth Court. They can then be sent back to the Family Court if necessary. I think the title and the commencement date fit well with this bill, and I am happy to speak briefly on that part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022 data-id=\u0022dc008c5a4d5f40a39e250eda7e3fcd4a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dc008c5a4d5f40a39e250eda7e3fcd4a\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I speak on the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill with some sadness. When I heard Mr Chester Borrows talking about this bill and what it intended to do with young children, I was reminded of my days in practice. I was reminded of the Act under which I worked, the Child Welfare Act 1925. Under the provisions of that Act, I was working in South Auckland with young children, young people, and their families. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EIn those days, after committing a very small number of reasonably minor offences, those young people were railroaded, which was the practice of the day. What we did then with those young children was very much what this bill tries to do with our 12 and 13-year-olds. The Minister might not recall those days, but I am sure her officials can inform her and show her the research. We sent those young children to national institutions, to undertake discipline training. There was one place called H\u014Dkio Beach School in the Horowhenua. There was Kohitere and places like Kingslea Residential Centre, and others. They were sent there to go through so-called intense training. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EAt one point, these young children were taken out to Camp Peak, owned by the then Department of Social Welfare, in the forest at the foothills of the Tararua Ranges, which is where these young people were given this kind of training. They were then brought back to Kohitere, and sent back to South Auckland. We were supposed to provide wraparound services for them at the time. Within a very short period of time, these young children ended up in youth justice facilities and in the criminal justice system. The recidivism rate was over 70 percent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EIt was because of those experiences that the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act was designed. It took 10 years to design. I was very involved with it, because of the work I was doing in those days. It took a long time to design the Act, but it really set out the major difference between care and protection, and youth justice. My colleagues have read out parts of the Act and the purpose behind it. But this bill takes us right back to pre-1974 days. I am confused as to what it delivers. I think it does nothing more than deliver the Government\u2019s punitive agenda. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EDuring the election campaign, National members talked so much about violence. They talked about how they would be very strong and punitive, and this is the unpacking of that agenda. Sometimes it is best to stop and rethink, and say: \u201CI now find myself in a different place. I now have material that officials have put before me, and on that basis I will design a much better and much more effective system.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EBut that is not what this bill does. It takes us to someplace else. That is why the title of this bill should be the \u201CShifting the Age of Criminal Responsibility Bill\u201D, because that seems to be its driver. It has a punitive mindset. It will do again to our 12 and 13-year-olds what the 1925 Child Welfare Act did. It was all of those kinds of things that were in the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act that focus on care and protection for that age group. We are talking about children and we are talking about care and protection needs. We know that the science and the opportunity are there. The system is there to do better for that particular group than where this bill takes us. Submitters to the select committee made it quite clear that this was a radical shift.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022 data-id=\u00220305494e67bd4be2b00b39ec217f7d72\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220305494e67bd4be2b00b39ec217f7d72\u0022\u003EDAVID GARRETT (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E We have heard the name Judge Andrew Becroft from both sides of the Chamber today in the time I have been here. It just so happens that I was in Christchurch last Monday and I ran into Judge Becroft, whom I had never met, at Christchurch Airport. I went up and spoke to him because I had read in that morning\u2019s paper an account of an address he had given the previous evening. The article said that Judge Becroft had talked about our having produced a lost generation of valueless children. I thought that that sounded remarkably prescient. So I went up, introduced myself, and asked him whether he had been accurately reported and he said that he had. He smiled slightly when I said \u201CWe\u2019re pretty much of a mind, then, Judge.\u201D He did not fall about making silly comments like Miss Dalziel would in that circumstance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003EJudge Becroft went on to say that we have produced a generation\u2014fortunately of only about 1,000 in his estimation, and he would know\u2014of young people with no values, no morals, and no idea of what is right or wrong. That is where 20 or 30 years of the kinds of policies that Mr Prasad advocates have got us. During his contribution I asked him, by way of interjection, how many child killers there were in 1974. I am sure he heard me, because I have a loud voice, but he ignored me, because there were none. The terrible system at that time that he was talking about, funnily enough, did not produce Bailey Junior Kurariki, aged 12. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003EI heard that Bailey\u2019s case had been discussed, and as I came in Chester Borrows was talking about him. When he was arrested at aged 12 and convicted of manslaughter he was sent to a youth justice facility and given intensive treatment, if you like, for want of a better word. He was given schooling, psychological assistance, and counselling. When he came to be released at age 18, I recall the Parole Board being quoted as saying that he was now a fine young man with a bright future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003EEverybody knows that very shortly after his release he breached parole, and breached parole again, and again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa11d54d2bb843a282affc1c5e0264b6\u0022\u003EDr Rajen Prasad\u003C/span\u003E: He was hounded.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022274d3432ebfa4666af02d43e0b571d43\u0022\u003EDAVID GARRETT\u003C/span\u003E: No, he was not hounded into beating up his girlfriend, I say to Mr Prasad. Sadly\u2014and I say \u201Csadly\u201D very seriously\u2014there is very little doubt that that man, and he is now a man, will reoffend seriously enough to be returned to prison for a long time. I feel sad about that both for him and for his victim. But it is no surprise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003EI remember seeing his mother on TV\u2014a dreadful-looking harridan from South Auckland, with several other children by different men. She has been facilitated in that lifestyle by the welfarism that Mr Prasad says is a great idea. That is just the point. The system that he thinks is so good has produced, over the last 20 and 30 years, a lost generation\u2014Judge Becroft said it himself. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003EI was talking the other day to a policeman in South Auckland who talked about going to houses where 4-year-old children were referring to the police as \u201Ceffing pigs\u201D and \u201Cpig c___ts\u201D. Those children have no hope at all; they will become Bailey Junior Kurariki. How can they not? They have been dragged up with no values\u2014as Judge Becroft said in his speech in Christchurch\u2014with no morals, and no idea of what is right and wrong. Members on the Opposition side are very fond of talking about root causes, drivers of crime, and all that stuff\u2014and it is not just members on that side. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003EThis bill, the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill, is the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff\u2014it is. It is necessary because of what we have produced with 20 or 30 years of welfarism. Until we face up to that root cause, we will have this happening again and again. The 4-year-old children whom my policeman acquaintance talked about will be, in 10 years\u2019 time, Bailey Junior Kurariki. How can they possibly be any different after being dragged up in that environment? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003EMr Prasad and others over there like Miss Dalziel talk about the wh\u0101nau, the family\u2014the whole philosophy that the family is best.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022 data-id=\u002279cc5e899cae407f96e67a798407e330\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002279cc5e899cae407f96e67a798407e330\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour\u2014Christchurch East):\u003C/span\u003E I have to respond to Mr Garrett\u2019s speech, because I feel there has been an utter misrepresentation of the position that members on this side of the Chamber have taken on this bill, and on why the bill is such a fundamental change to our Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989, which was world-leading legislation when it was introduced, and which has been looked at by other countries as a means for trying to get underneath the problems.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI cannot believe that that member can describe another human being as a harridan and then describe her circumstances. That member does not know the circumstances she was brought up in; nor does he understand the environment Bailey Junior Kurariki was born in. I think it is really unfair to use that one example of a child who was convicted of manslaughter because he was part of a group. He rang the pizza place, and he opened the door when Michael Choy arrived, but I do not know how much he was led. I do not know how much pressure was put on him to do that. He was 12 years old; he was a child. I cannot believe\u2014and I think it has been absent from this debate\u2014the lack of responsibility that the ACT Party is prepared to take for what is, as the member says, a loss of values in our society, where we have children brought up who are so utterly and completely damaged that their lives will never, ever, fulfil the potential they might have had at the moment they were born.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI am really interested in what we can do across party lines to get underneath those drivers of crime. That is why I attended the ministerial meeting on the drivers of crime that was co-hosted by the Hon Pita Sharples and the Hon Simon Power. I really enjoyed that day, because I was able to sit there, listen, and discuss issues with people who were all there with a common thread, which was to determine what we could do to intervene earlier in the lives of these young people to ensure that they do not become the horrible offenders we are dealing with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EAfter I attended that meeting I was so struck by the passion of everyone in that room that I went back to the Labour caucus and said that I wanted us to do something we did not normally do: I wanted us to offer to work with the Government collaboratively on the underlying drivers of crime. I said: \u201CLet\u2019s do the 0 to 12-year-olds. We are not going to agree on 12 and 13-year-olds, and we are not going to agree on boot camps, but we do want evidence-based interventions for 0 to 12-year-olds. Let\u2019s do that.\u201D Did I get a positive response from the Government when I made that offer? No. I have been told that the Government is prepared to work with us on the Sale of Liquor Act but is not prepared at this stage to work on other legislation. Government members are saying: \u201CLet\u2019s just see how we go with the Sale of Liquor Act, and if that works then maybe we\u2019ll sit down and talk to you about what really matters.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI can tell members that there is not one single person working with children in this country who does not want both sides of this Parliament to put down the battle lines on the 0 to 12-year-olds. They want us to work together to come up with the solutions that will address the fundamental change in our society, which happened in the 1970s or whenever Rajen Prasad was working as a social worker on the ground. The difference then was that we had parents in employment, but I know that in the days of Roger Douglas the number of people working for the railways went from 22,000 to 7,000 over the course of 2 years. If members want to look at the cause of youth suicide, and if they want to look at the cause of some of the issues that affected children in the 1990s, they need look only at the massive redundancies that occurred in the 1980s.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI think we all have to put aside some of the concerns we have about protecting certain positions, and actually get real here. We are talking about children being given the responsibility of young people who are much older than they are\u2014children who really have not had the chance to achieve their full potential in life. I believe that New Zealanders will back us for doing that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261e75e14c31b4617aac4097df7a08af8\u0022\u003EChris Tremain\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The debate has been somewhat wide-ranging and I just want to bring it back to relevancy. This debate is on the title and commencement of the principal Act, and in future speeches I ask you to make sure we are focusing on the title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255958a0dbccd41178af657f9c5b5aa9c\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5a8bc62520f420f8ad17739aaed8a4f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I do not need any help with this. The member makes a fair point, but the title clauses and so on are generally construed to be in the nature of a summing-up debate, and I think members should cast their comments in terms of summing up. I think we have strayed a bit beyond that, but with points well made; the Committee needs to debate things on occasion. I just say to future speakers that when I call them, the debate is in the nature of summing up the evidence. That is what this is about, not starting off on a first-reading speech. I know that passion is running high, and that is a good thing. But let us stick within the rules and have summing-up speeches.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00223b995e1a799140c2bbe8f2d052ad04b8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223b995e1a799140c2bbe8f2d052ad04b8\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think that it is a fair thing that people do sum up in this title debate, but they should at least refer to the title, I think. It is all very well to sum up an argument, but to advance the same old argument again does step outside that. You have called it right; I am not questioning that, but I think that it would be good to hear the title mentioned a few times\u2014or some alternative, perhaps.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2300c65159346bbbd90a78e15563c90\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the honourable member, but I tell the Committee that experience has shown that people will mention clause 1 and then go off and mention clause 2 and other things that they can technically make reference to. I hope that members who speak from now on will address the clauses under debate in the nature of a summing up, not a relitigation or an advancing of new arguments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u0022d5cec1dda5804466ba4826ec59578646\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d5cec1dda5804466ba4826ec59578646\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I accept the invitation of the Government member Chester Borrows to make sure that we have a good debate on clauses 1, 2, and 3 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill. I think we are really getting to the crux of the matter now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI particularly want to talk about the commencement date, because I am interested in what it means for the Te Hurihanga facility, based in Hamilton. If people have been following the debate they will know that this case really again demonstrates a difference between what the Government is proposing and what Labour believes is a really comprehensive approach to youth justice issues and youth crime. In Hamilton both Catholic Bishop Denis Browne and Anglican Archbishop David Moxon have come out calling for the Government to continue the funding of Te Hurihanga. I think the Hamilton community is looking at that decision and saying that on the one hand the Government is saying that it is wrong\u2014it is the wrong model, it is too expensive, and we should shut it down\u2014but on the other hand the two leading clerics in our city are saying that they want it kept open. Who is right in this debate? It is interesting that the Labour Party also sides on that side of the debate. I know which, out of those choices, I would put my faith in. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022602d53fa21ee4b1eaab1205b76dc4e65\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Where\u2019s the title?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4d8fa8fe55b4ae481bc1c7ac5f4b0bf\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: The honourable member wants to hear what the bishops have to say, and I am happy to oblige. They said: \u201CThis decision has been based on the belief that the cost of turning 16-year-old frequent offenders into good citizens outweighs the benefits of having young men fully functioning in society as family members, workers and taxpayers,\u201D. The article that quoted them goes on to say: \u201CThe bishops were unimpressed by the Government\u2019s replacement \u2018Fresh Start\u2019 policy, due to be in place by October.\u201D The reason that the bishops made a comment about being opposed to the Fresh Start policy, starting in October, was that that is what the Government has said it will replace the Te Hurihanga model with. The two principal clerics in our city were saying that they think it is the wrong approach. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003ELet us have a look at the title of this bill. When I am talking to people about what this bill does and I mention its title, they have no idea what it actually means. But when I say to them that it is the \u201CBoot Camps Bill\u201D, then they understand. That is what people know the Fresh Start programme as. It is actually about boot camps. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221163c8139d044d8b81e39b4922995d93\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: The Prime Minister called it that. John Key called it that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229020090b471a4684aa9a868667641e3a\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: John Key first labelled it as boot camps; in fact, that is what it is about. People are not fooled. The people of Hamilton are asking why a programme that has been running in our city for 3 years as a pilot, proven to work with the most serious and most difficult offenders\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eefeeeb3a0fc4657a3e5d88705c8760d\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: What about the title?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a223dde1b0e4e5aa143d72f867a62cd\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Mr Brownlee that I am talking about the commencement date: Te Hurihanga finishes in June, and Fresh Start starts in October. What will happen in the intervening period? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003ENot only that, but what will happen come 1 October? I have heard three different versions. I have heard that that Te Hurihanga will be replaced with a programme where offenders go through a 12-month process. That is eight offenders going through a 12-month process. Members should remember that this is an 8-bed facility. Yet the Minister for Social Development and Employment is standing up at every opportunity and saying that it will deal with many, many more offenders than it was, and that is why the Government had to close down Te Hurihanga. But if only 8 offenders are to go through this programme for a year, then where will it deal with those many, many more\u2014with the many, many more that the Minister has promised? It cannot. Some people may say that we can shorten the programme so that it is only 2 months, and then we will be able to push them through faster and we will get the numbers that the Minister wants. What will that achieve? It will not actually rehabilitate anybody. These young men have committed an average of 23 offences before they even walk through the door. If they are going to be pushed through in a matter of 2 or 3 months\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u00225d81e4c360bf48f6b8adb81c2be986e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225d81e4c360bf48f6b8adb81c2be986e1\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022daf6c23a3678472bbf4c4b7a51cc133d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I am prepared to entertain another speaker, but I invite the speaker to address the bill in the way intended in this debate\u2014that is, a summing up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022 data-id=\u0022f420fa1c552f40b98b224f18fd325b85\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f420fa1c552f40b98b224f18fd325b85\u0022\u003EHon STEVE CHADWICK (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to take a call on the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill tonight. The title of this bill is rather clunky as it is. But having looked at what will result from this bill\u2014and also from its commencement date; my colleague Sue Moroney has very clearly pointed to this\u2014I say we will need to have a children\u2019s prison bill. I will just talk about the youth justice central site, which has been built in Rotorua. The National members of our community led a campaign not to have that youth justice site built in Rotorua. Ruth Dyson and I spent a long time looking for it, because we said these were our kids and they needed to be looked after. We knew that they were children and that they needed to be given wraparound services. But National members very clearly said we should not have the facility at Kaharoa. They grew vociferous about that, and the meetings about that site were some of the most difficult public meetings that I went to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EThere is a delicious irony here tonight: National is building a youth justice central site in Rotorua and closing down Te Hurihanga, which is an hour\u2019s drive away in Hamilton, when the call from the provisions of this bill and the requirements that it gives to the Youth Court are to criminalise children of 12 and 13, who will need to be placed on short-term programmes of about 13 weeks in order to turn their lives round. There is an irony here. National members complained during the election campaign that they did not want to have these facilities in their backyard. They said we should take the youth justice facility out of Rotorua and put it up in the forest. We fought\u2014I fought\u2014to have that facility sited in our community. Now the Minister is coming in, with Todd McClay, the member for Rotorua, and lauding how fantastic National is in dealing with the young kids in our community. Yet just 1 hour away from Rotorua, National is closing down a model facility in Hamilton that is second to none in the country, and that we learnt from in terms of its success, when already we are being told that not enough beds will be built in the Rotorua facility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003ENational has done no long-term planning. The commencement date of October for this bill is absolutely, totally unrealistic. This is all because National went out on the campaign trail with rhetoric and slogans, saying it would get tough on crime. But this bill does not fix the criminal offending of young children. The title of this bill is, I suggest, quite wrong with regard to the provisions that it gives to the Youth Court. I think that we should have called the bill the \u201CAbout Children and the Family Court Bill\u201D, in light of the provisions around jurisdiction and orders that are required in order to fix the drivers of crime in our community. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003ESo here we are crammed into urgency tonight, in absolute chaos, I have to say. There was no question time in the House today, because the Government could not bear to go under the scrutiny of the media. We are going until midnight tonight in a shambolic way; proceedings have been managed absolutely shambolically. We succeeded in moving a part in the bill that we were debating previously, and the senior Government whip quickly looked embarrassed, so the Speaker came to the House and the Government tried to fix things up. We will argue and debate this bill tonight. The commencement date is a shambles. The bill is just a farce. It is about the Government saying it will fix the issue of youth offending by October. Well, we will not have our youth justice site in Rotorua ready in October. By October Te Hurihanga will be closed down\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223c0e9a7cb7bd41f89b2300054b661da3\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: By June.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292f6a5f735b2460aae5d05a99b032052\u0022\u003EHon STEVE CHADWICK\u003C/span\u003E:\u2014by June\u2014and that is a sign that this Government is in absolute chaos about addressing criminal offending ranging from children right through the spectrum to young people who are classified as adults when they are 17 years of age.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022 data-id=\u002234fa5ff7c829439199fe5b35c1cd9eaa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002234fa5ff7c829439199fe5b35c1cd9eaa\u0022\u003ETODD McCLAY (National\u2014Rotorua):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022 data-id=\u00229d822f50f6034f76ac0082a5335f21a0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229d822f50f6034f76ac0082a5335f21a0\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to speak to the commencement date of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill. I take it that the Minister in the chair, the Hon Paula Bennett, is satisfied that the time frame allowed for this bill to come into operation is enough to do the complex development work that must be done in order to satisfy the direction that this Minister is trying to set. I have a sense that the time frame is too short. I will explain. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EI say to Mr Brownlee that it may be useful for him to reflect on what it actually takes to design a new model to begin to address the complex needs of people of this nature. If everything was working, a bill like this would not need to be brought to the House. A whole new science needs to be brought together. \u201CWraparound services\u201D is a term that is very easy to use. I have heard for the last 10 years, or longer, that they are what we are trying to do, and many have tried to design wraparound services and apply them to the lives of troubled young people and difficult families. In fact, many of them have been highly unsuccessful. They have been highly unsuccessful because the political masters have not allowed enough time for the complex models to be developed and tested before we subjected the lives of people who are at a vulnerable time to them. That member over there talks a lot. What is it that he is trying to say?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6497988e4f246bd91ca0f9970705b20\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: The political masters over the last 10 years, when you have been saying that the system has failed, were the Labour Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f300fc53400459ca7092cd257749200\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I heard the member and I would like him to hear me now. I wonder if that member knows how it long it took to develop the particular model of Te Hurihanga?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240a7d1d3dfae40d98c935d521a4a33a4\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: No, I don\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022005bbe0dba4548f4b3546bbf50db8cf7\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the member should not speak if the member is not aware. That model was one that has been shown to be successful, I say to the Minister, and it took a long time to design and put together. It is successful, yet what is the Government doing with it? I use that example only to show that these models that the Minister believes will materialise will take some considerable time to design. It will not be like the national standards, which are untested, untried, and are having a lot of problems, and will not succeed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EBut this particular time frame\u2014[Interruption]\u2014I am reasonably informed about this, I say to Mr Lotu-Iiga. It is not possible to design a model in a short period from what will be a relatively standing start. If it were not being designed from a standing start, it would be in operation already, and it is not. The Minister will probably regret it when we bring up case after case in the coming years of failure. When we do, I hope the members sitting up the back there laughing will apologise. Indeed, that is what they will need to do. I say that to the three members\u2014the troika\u2014who are sitting there, the new members of the National Party, including Mr McClay and Mr Sam Lotu-Iiga. They should take the time to have the courage of their convictions and say that this October 2010 start date could not possibly be adequate to design the models, test them, resource them, and put them into operation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EThe model that has been successfully operating will come to a close in June, I have been told. Fresh Start is not designed to deliver on the needs of this group of seriously needy young people or service their families. I believe the Minister ought to explain how that will be done, and in some substantive way, not just by saying that the Government has tried a little of the boot camp model somewhere, and some of it works, or that the Minister attended a graduation of some sort, therefore it will work everywhere. I think trialling something like this on the vulnerable lives of our children requires a lot more thought and a lot more time. We need some assurances that, indeed, that development time will allowed for. Therefore this particular commencement date is inadequate, because it is not easy to bring a model together; unless it is brought together carefully, it will not work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u002216b278289c3d479da5f01977b22f65ae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002216b278289c3d479da5f01977b22f65ae\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002221e4a48683cf45dfbff4ed945ff4a3b6\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001188\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jacinda Ardern to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001189\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CJurisdiction and\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b9940f9597754bffb1ca6d7accc96c13\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227bd70eda18174f849d9ca17148c0083d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e9b5ae17947741e8b90feacce7edb90c\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ef67642d2ad47d695a8f86649e3dae4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The amendments in the name of Jacinda Ardern to insert new clause 2A, an expiry clause, are ruled out of order because they are inconsistent with Standing Order 3: \u201Cpreliminary clauses means the title clause and the commencement clause and, if applicable, a principal Act clause\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00223556919feac047ae8914741db044976b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001191\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001192\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00220743821e4f8d4ce2a1322a527b834ac5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220743821e4f8d4ce2a1322a527b834ac5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, That the report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c9cfd3effc6f460b8b81b2bf5a342782\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022712f52496f414fd8bb922ce8f599ca0a\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022 data-id=\u0022612de25bcf884200812bed2474001818\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022612de25bcf884200812bed2474001818\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. Others deserve to be recognised for a lot of the work that went into this bill. Some of them worked on the bill when I was in Opposition, and others have worked on the bill since I became the Minister. I recognise Anne Tolley and Chester Borrows, and Simon Power had a lot to do with this bill, as well. They paid a huge part in bringing it together in those early days. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EI recognise the chair of the Social Services Committee, Katrina Shanks, for the work she did in getting the bill through the select committee. We certainly took on board some of the changes that were recommended by the select committee members after they heard from submitters. I thank Child, Youth and Family, and not just the officials who sat there for many, many hours going through the very detailed implications of this legislation. I recognise those who have actually done the work so far to implement the bill. We heard a previous speaker talk about how these things do not happen quickly or lightly, and that person is right. It takes a lot of evidence-based work, and it means going back to what really does work. But a lot of this bill is, of course, about extending current orders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EI also recognise those amazing people who work in our youth justice sector. There are so many of them, both in non-governmental organisations and within Child, Youth and Family. They work with young people in our communities, and they work hard to try to turn their lives round. There is also a whole bunch of people who work in our facilities, which are pretty daunting places in which to work, at times. I acknowledge that I admire the work they do. It is probably the most important work we do, and this bill, I hope, will back them up. That is the bill\u2019s purpose. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EThe bill represents the most significant changes to New Zealand\u2019s youth justice system since 1989. It underpins this Government\u2019s Fresh Start programme, which is our rock-solid commitment to dealing with serious youth crime. New Zealand\u2019s youth justice system is rightly regarded as world class in delivering a sensible criminal justice model for 95 percent of young offenders. But it is a well-recognised fact that, as in most places in the world, the system is not working for the 5 percent at the hard end of criminal offending\u2014anywhere between 900 and 1,000 young people who are on a fast track to prison. Fresh Start is aimed at giving those young people a new future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EWe have seen a weekend of young people out of control. There have been serious attacks on members of the police and the public, and some of the offenders are very young. The nine Tuakau teenagers who have been charged with the vicious assault of a police officer are aged between 14 and 18. Fortunately, these young people do not represent the majority of teenagers, but they do highlight the growing problem of serious and violent offences carried out by young people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EThe Government is prepared to provide some real protections for the public. We are demanding real accountability from serious young offenders. We are also offering them practical help to change their behaviour, and real opportunities to live happy and successful lives. This bill does that by providing the Youth Court with a toolbox with a much wider range of sentencing options. These new tougher and longer orders will allow us to make inroads into the underlying causes of these young people\u2019s offending. But that is not the whole story. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EThe Fresh Start package also supports prevention and early intervention. We want to steer young people away from trouble, and say \u201CWell done!\u201D when a young person makes a positive change in his or her life. We provided the places for the 100 young people we saw in January on the Prime Minister\u2019s holiday programme for young people who have been in trouble but have turned their lives round. We saw that what happened was hugely successful. We put them in front of the right sort of role models, and we saw something positive happening for those young people. It was really encouraging. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EThis summer we had 15,000 places for young people on 1-week breakaway holiday programmes. Those young people would not normally have been able to afford something like that. They come from families who were a bit under stress, and they were getting to the end of a long holiday period. They were starting to get a bit antsy, and they were starting to get into trouble. So we took recommendations from police, from sports clubs, and from the grassroots people who brought those kids together. It was basic early intervention, but we certainly saw a difference in those young people. It got them off the roads, and it got them into contact with positive role models. They were with mentors from their own communities who really invested a lot in them. Early intervention is about getting to kids as young as 11 before they make choices and before they go off the rails. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EThe Government is also supporting the community sector that helps children at risk. We are developing a new way of working with the community providers that are providing home-based programmes and providing really early intervention in dealing with some of our most vulnerable families\u2014families who are really not doing too well, at all. The new high-trust contracts cut bureaucracy and allow providers to be innovative and flexible in order to achieve the best results for their clients, and I must say I have a personal bias, because for me it is about the children. So they are the services that actually make a difference in our communities. We have heard those providers saying for 10 years that they want more flexibility and the ability to get on and do the stuff that really matters, instead of ticking a whole lot of boxes. They want to be able to move their contracts around and have freedom within them. Dr Prasad shakes his head, but that is because there was not that level of understanding by the previous Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EWe are saying to people that they know what works best for their people and their communities, and we trust them to get on and do as much as they can by way of early intervention. We heard earlier from another member who said that we have seen that for years and it has not worked in many cases, because it has happened too quickly. I would agree in some respects. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EIt is quite amusing that last year the criticism from members on the other side was that the bill was taking too long to come to the House. It was October, they said. A year had passed, and why was I mucking around so much? The other criticism was that it cost too much money. Quite frankly, we need to put the right dollars behind it. I am talking a $152 million investment in these young people, and it starts with early intervention and goes on to make the differences that are needed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EIf this Government was not backing up this programme with real dollars so that the professionals can work in the right way with those young people, then I too would have concerns, but I do not. This bill will make a significant difference to young people\u2019s lives. It will make a difference to the young people who, quite frankly, have been left on the scrap heap of despair that leads to victims behind them and continued offending, which leads them to adult jail. We will not give up on them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EThe bill will provide for longer orders. The research tells us we need to work much longer with these tough young people if we are to effect change in them and in their families\u2019 lives. We are doubling the maximum length of the Youth Court\u2019s top-end sentences. The maximum lengths of supervision with activity orders and supervision with residence orders are doubled. The maximum length of the supervision orders that kick in after a young person finishes supervision with activity or leaves the residence is also doubled, and that is significant. Common sense and research tell us that intensive, long-term supervision of youth in their communities is necessary if these young offenders are to avoid a lifetime of crime and punishment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EThere is a wider range of orders. Serious youth offenders are often the product of their environment. Some families need to take greater responsibility for the path their kids are on. [Interruption] I am sorry; the member cannot have heard the beginning of my speech. I talked about early intervention, better community programmes, and the investment in communities at the early intervention stage, all of which this range of Fresh Start packages will adjust. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EThe bill will enable the Youth Court to order the parents of these kids to attend parenting programmes. Youngsters who are parents themselves\u2014there are a number of them, unfortunately\u2014will face parenting orders too, so that they will have the opportunity to learn what good parenting is. Successful people who have overcome the most awful hardship in life can point to a single adult, more often than not, who has backed them, showed them the way, and stood beside them through the tough times. The Youth Court will now have the option of mentoring programmes for these often very alienated young people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003EAlcohol and drug abuse is behind many a criminal act. The Youth Court will now have the power to order youth offenders to undertake drug and alcohol rehabilitation, and this will be backed up by new community and residential placements. There will be young offenders who fail to grasp the opportunities provided to them under this bill. Accordingly, the bill provides the public with better protection by significantly increasing maximum sentences and by way of new orders for repeat offenders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003ESerious youth offenders will face more intensive monitoring in their communities, including electronic monitoring and curfews. If they flout orders, they will find themselves back before the Youth Court to face the consequences. This bill has been improved by the consideration given to it by the Social Services Committee. It is the sharp end of the Fresh Start programme. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022 data-id=\u00220b436b61f80646dd869834115e553c4e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b436b61f80646dd869834115e553c4e\u0022\u003EJACINDA ARDERN (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E After so much debate I personally see the third reading of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill as an opportunity to say some most important things and to reflect on the core of what this bill represents and what the Government is truly proposing. First, I want to acknowledge something that the Government has continually thrown back at Opposition members as we have contested the prospects of this legislation proving to be successful. Opposition members continually face an assumption by members in this House that we do not understand that some people in our criminal justice system just cannot be reformed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI say to Government members that we acknowledge that that is the case. In fact, I grew up with someone who worked in our criminal justice system. I have always been very open about the fact that my father is a policeman. While growing up, I watched as he dealt with some of the most horrific criminal offending that I think a human being would ever want to see. We acknowledge that there are people in our criminal justice system who are beyond help, but we have always argued that we cannot tarnish our young people with that same brush. We must acknowledge that we have a tiered system in New Zealand for good reason, and that 17-year-olds and under, and 12 and 13-year-olds, should not, by default, be moved on in our criminal justice system before it is right to do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI want to reflect on why we have that core principle in our legislation. Why is it that we deem our young people to be different, to be a special case, as it were? I think it comes down to a very simple reason. It is one that I think even Minister Power would acknowledge; he is, after all, the Minister who hosted the Drivers of Crime meeting here in Parliament. If we put all of our young offenders, even the top 1,000 whom the Government claims it is trying to deal with, into a room, we will see the same characteristics in each of them. We will see young people who are disengaged from education and/or employment. We will see young people who have been subjected to violence, either in the home or gang-related violence. We will see young people who have been subjected to drug and alcohol abuse, 80 percent of whom would have been under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time that they committed their offence. We will see social deprivation: young people who claim that their families have not had enough to enable them to get by. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI find it utterly abhorrent to hear the ACT Party member Mr David Garrett claim that a decade of Labour policies, as he put it, is to blame for all of those factors existing in a young person\u2019s life, and that that is the contributing factor to those young people\u2019s offending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022186f456855cc4f7fa2df9f6a962089e2\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: 25 years of welfare is what I said.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022582a0a4014804d3795d881287e912b51\u0022\u003EJACINDA ARDERN\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Mr Garrett that I grew up from a young age in a town that demonstrated why our young people end up in the situations that they are in. In the 1980s I lived in a small place called Murupara, which will be known to Todd McClay. That town suffered under the weight of privatisation and a central government that at that time did not care for its most vulnerable families and young people. When I was young the seeds were being sown for our young people\u2019s future criminal offending. The Salvation Army, the Youth Court judge, and any number of other people who work in the social sector acknowledge that Rogernomics has a lot to answer for, and so do the policies of the 1990s. I am not saying here that that situation is the entire contributing factor to the youth offending encased in this bill, but that the bill is a blunt instrument for dealing with a much deeper problem, which goes back decades beyond our own time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EBecause we know of all of those causes, and because we know of all of those catalysts, the obligation sits on us and on our communities to turn lives round. We know what the contributing factors to youth offending are, and if we ignore them it means that we are ignoring our responsibility, as well. I believe that when communities know about all of these factors that exist, it is up to us to make sure that we intervene at the right point. This issue goes beyond the age at which young people enter our criminal justice system. If we already know that 80 percent of our young people are under the influence of drugs and alcohol when they offend, why are we waiting to issue court orders on those young people when they hit the Youth Court? What are we doing to intervene before criminal offending occurs? I have seen no deep financial investment into that area. In fact, if we speak to the people at Odyssey House they will tell us that we are waiting until it is too late. We must do more. Members on this side of the House would happily work with the Government on any initiative to proactively intervene at an early point in those young people\u2019s lives.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI do believe\u2014and I have heard the explanations, often very rational ones, from Chester Borrows about why 12 and 13-year olds are being shifted into the Youth Court\u2014that inherently this is a shift in criminal responsibility, and I stand against that. I stand against the notion that the issue is just about expediency; I think it is much more symbolic than that. I believe we are giving away one of our greatest powers here, which is to deal with families at the same time as we deal with young offenders. As Lianne Dalziel has pointed out numerous times, none of us would claim that a 12 or 13-year-old who is committing an indictable offence with a criminal penalty of 14 years or more is doing that in isolation and has come from a perfect background or family. So why are we disempowering ourselves and taking away the ability to deal with that young person\u2019s family as well as the young person, when we know that there are care and protection issues at play? This is a fundamental shift. I acknowledge what the Minister has said; I agree with her. That is why we oppose the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EThe second most significant part of this bill that has been discussed probably did not need to be included in legislation. It is the policy change around the much-disputed term \u201Cboot camp\u201D. Anyone who is listening to this debate might question why the Government is upset with us using that term, although I still maintain that it was the Prime Minister who first used it publicly to describe the Government\u2019s direction on youth justice. I believe he did that just after the election, in February, I think. Perhaps we called the policy that, because it looks very much like corrective training, which had a 92 percent failure rate\u2014a 92 percent occurrence of reoffending amongst those who graduated from it. Perhaps we called the policy \u201Cboot camps\u201D because almost every submitter who came to the Social Services Committee also believed from the description that National\u2019s policy would be close to corrective training, or like every other failed initiative of that type overseas. Perhaps it was because the providers came to us, described to us the programmes that they already offer in New Zealand, and said that if the Government really was going to do a wraparound programme, the providers already did exactly what the Government was describing: getting to the core of offending and issues, working with families, and trying to move young people into employment. It was misleading to the public for National to claim that its policy was something different from what providers were doing. That was what caused the confusion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EWhether it was an intentional move or not, the cynical part of me says the term \u201Cboot camps\u201D came out because it appealed to people. It sounded good. Now we hear the Government disputing that that is what it is trying to do. I believe that the confusion can rest only at the feet of the Government on that. But if the National members are genuinely trying to create a wraparound programme that incorporates all of the elements of multi-systemic therapy, for instance, why did we not invest in the kinds of initiatives that the Minister has already referred to: those of the people who are already working closely in their communities, who already have that experience, and who have demonstrated that they are the one person who can turn a young person\u2019s life around? Why did we start something completely new with the army? That is where the confusion has come from. Closing down Te Hurihanga proved only to reinforce that, in my mind. Let us evaluate what we have and invest in what we have. That is exactly what we could have had with Te Hurihanga, and that is exactly what I think would have led to a successful path forward in our criminal youth justice system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003ETo sum up, I say youth justice is one of many areas that I feel quite passionately about, but I have felt let down by this bill. I feel that it has shifted what was incredibly forward-thinking legislation and changed it fundamentally. I acknowledge that changing it back, in a political sense, will always be very difficult. I ask that in future debates perhaps Government members may consider a situation where next time, instead of talking about those young kids whom they perceive to have already failed, we start to talk about how we can intervene earlier and turn those kids\u2019 lives around.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022 data-id=\u0022cb8ee45242fd43898c24916592728870\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cb8ee45242fd43898c24916592728870\u0022\u003EHEKIA PARATA (National): \u003C/span\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe, e te Mana Whakaw\u0101. T\u0113n\u0101 k\u014Drua, te Minita Take M\u0101ori me te Minita whakahaere i t\u0113nei pire, otir\u0101, huri noa i t\u014D t\u0101tou Whare i t\u0113nei p\u014D, t\u0113n\u0101 koutou katoa. E t\u016B ana au ki te tautoko i t\u0113nei pire engari me te mihi tuatahi ki te ture matua n\u0101 te mea, pakeke ake i te rua tekau tau t\u0113nei ture e mahi ana, \u0101, kei te haere tonu te ia o t\u0113r\u0101 ture matua i roto i t\u0113nei pire, n\u0101 reira, e tautoko ana.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003E[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. Greetings to you two, the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs and the Minister responsible for this bill; and, indeed, to you all throughout our House this evening. Greetings to you all. I rise to support this bill, but must first acknowledge the original Act, which has been in place for 20 years. Its ethos continues in this bill, so I endorse it emphatically.] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003EThis bill is focused on three main things. It expands the jurisdiction of the Youth Court so that 12 and 13-year-olds who commit the most serious crimes can be incorporated in the jurisdiction of the court. It strengthens and expands the orders that the Youth Court is able to make, including parenting education, mentoring, and drug and alcohol programmes. It also creates tougher and more effective sentences to get these young offenders back on track. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003EIn the past week alone we have seen a number of examples of the kind of offending that this bill is directed at. In T\u012Btahi Bay this week a massive fire devastated 75 hectares of Whitireia Park, and the offender who is responsible for that arson and who has been arrested is a 14-year-old. Yesterday\u2019s headlines showed that a 15-year-old boy appeared in the Gisborne District Court. He was accused of bashing a young mother on the head with a crowbar as she was out running with her toddler. The young mother was unknown to the boy. The Minister has already referred to the off-duty policeman in Tuakau, who was set upon when trying to break up a fight, and we have also seen news stories of the tragic outcome for Liberty Templeman. These are just a few examples of a very small group of young offenders who are, nevertheless, committing very, very serious offences. There is no end to the high-profile cases involving youth offenders, but there needs to be an appropriate response, and that is why I commend Minister Bennett for her work in bringing this bill to the House, as well as the others who have worked alongside this kaupapa. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003EWe need to deal with young offenders in this age group and front-foot the issue. The previous Government seemed happy to wait until they were older and had committed more serious offences and then tried to put them through the adult system and rehabilitation programmes. Andrew Becroft said that there were not enough tools available for the Youth Court, and recommended changes, which can be seen in this bill. Members opposite have asked whether anybody thinks that a youth offence happens in isolation. No, and certainly no member on this side of the Chamber thinks that. But this bill is focused on the fact that it does happen, and it happens amongst a very small number of youth offenders. Yes, there are other contributing factors, such as a dysfunctional home life, low or benefit-dependent income, poor health, poor education, poor housing, and identity and self-esteem issues. That is why this Government as recently as 2 weeks ago, in the form of the Prime Minister\u2019s statement, talked about the wide and comprehensive agenda that this Government is committed to. This bill focuses on a specific part of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003EThe Prime Minister\u2019s statement talked about the Government\u2019s priority of growing the economy, and the need for national standards addressing low educational attainment. We recognise that young people have the opportunity of getting a good education, and, using national standards, they have an early warning system that identifies that they are failing in the education system, and this can be addressed. We understand that a good education will help to divert young people from an otherwise difficult pathway, and into having better educational options. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003EWe understand that growing the economy will lead to better employment prospects and more investment in business, and will expand and increase the standard of living. We understand that Treaty settlements will contribute to the restoration of an economic base and the ability for iwi to practise tino rangatiratanga rather than the tino k\u0101wanatanga recipe that the previous Labour administration constantly fed into the M\u0101ori communities while it was in Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003ENobody thinks that a youth offence happens in isolation. Members opposite kept saying somewhat emotively, and thereby misleading the public listening to this, that these offenders are only children. Of course, we are not talking about all 12 and 13-year-olds. Perhaps that has escaped everybody\u2019s attention, including members opposite. We are talking about the very small group of 12 and 13-year-olds who have invaded homes and grievously assaulted other people. Let me assure members that the victims of those crimes do not think they will not be upset because it was only a 12-year-old, or it was only a 13-year-old, who committed the crime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003EWhen we talk about rights, we also have to talk about reciprocal responsibilities. When we quote United Nations conventions, we need to quote a wide range of them. Let me give members an example. Article 40.1 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states that children who offend should be dealt with in a way that \u201Creinforces the child\u2019s respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of others \u2026\u201D, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d33233811fe945e193716177f7fe535c\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, children, that is right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a455a208ff944ebb875c4f73b588c4b4\u0022\u003EHEKIA PARATA\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, we are talking about children, but we are talking about that very small group of children who are seriously offending. No, it does not apply to all children. Yes, this bill expands the jurisdiction of the Youth Court, but, no, it does not create child criminals. It allows the court to deal with those who commit crimes. Yes, it provides an expanded range of tools, but, no, it does not assume that the judges will suddenly go mad and apply that jurisdiction indiscriminately. In fact, I can tell members of this House that a very constructive project is going on right at this moment in the Porirua District Court, working with and talking with the very diverse communities that make up Porirua about how the court can better serve the interests of the community. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003EThe Youth Court jurisdiction is being expanded in order to give a wider range of tools to judges so that they can deal with the issues that confront them. They will not be used willy-nilly; they will be used only on the youth offenders who break the law. We are not talking about all 12 and 13-year-olds, and members opposite would do the country a favour if they stopped scaremongering and focused on that fact. The Youth Court said that youth offending has remained at the same level for the past 5 or so years, after a steep increase before then. A recent newsletter from the court claims that it is reasonably certain that the age at which young people begin to commit violent offences is getting younger, and that the violence committed by young people is becoming more serious. It continues, arguing that the real solutions will be found in coordinated inter-agency, properly funded, early intervention programmes. That is what this Government is doing. We agree, and we have committed to funding tens of millions of dollars to reduce youth offending, because unlike members opposite, when we commit to a policy we put real dollars into it. We do not talk about it; we get on and do it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003EThe Minister has outlined a range of those coordinated, integrated agencies that are working with each other to ensure that we can assist these young people to get back on a path of leading a quality life not only for themselves but for the wh\u0101nau, hap\u016B, and iwi, which members opposite find easy to trip off their lips but do not understand how hard it actually is to work within those wh\u0101nau, hap\u016B, and iwi, who every day try to ensure that their young people make good choices in life. I commend this bill to the House. I thank the Minister for the work she has done on this bill, and the officials who have worked alongside her to make this possible. N\u014D reira, t\u0113n\u0101 koutou, kia ora t\u0101tou katoa.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9d9cf26893d4616aee0347d7dacb346\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9d9cf26893d4616aee0347d7dacb346\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour\u2014Christchurch East):\u003C/span\u003E I believe that this Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill is a shameful bill. It is without hope for a generation of young people who have been referred to tonight, and it undermines the philosophy of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act, which it amends. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI draw the attention of the House to just a few of the provisions of this Act: the principles upon which it is based. First, and I have already mentioned this in the Committee stage, it is: \u201CAn Act to reform the law relating to children and young persons who are in need of care or protection or who offend against the law\u201D. The comment I made in the Committee stage was that for those who offend against the law there are always\u2014always\u2014care and protection issues. The purpose of the Act is also \u201Cto advance the well-being of families and the well-being of children and young persons as members of families, whanau, hapu, iwi, and family groups:\u201D. It talks about making provision for families \u201Cto receive assistance in caring for their children and young persons:\u201D, and its purpose is also \u201Cto make provision for matters relating to children and young persons \u2026 who have offended against the law to be resolved, wherever possible, by their own family, whanau, hapu, iwi, or family group:\u201D. The intention of the legislation is summarised in that introductory provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThen we have the principles of care and protection in Part 2 of the Act. The care and protection principles state, first of all, the utmost concern of this legislation, which is: \u201Cthe principle that children and young persons must be protected from harm, their rights upheld, and their welfare promoted:\u201D. The second principle in section 13 of the Act states: \u201C(b) the principle that the primary role in caring for and protecting a child or young person lies with the child\u2019s or young person\u2019s family, whanau, hapu, iwi, and family group,\u201D. That is all very well and good when things are good at home. It is not very good for those who do not have the range of opportunities available to them that all of the members of this House have had. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThen we have the youth justice principles. There is one thing that I do not think this House has taken into account. We have heard the Minister for Social Development and Employment and others say that one of the reasons why we have to have this legislation is to provide for some clout, as it were, to ensure that orders can be put in place before the matter goes before the Family Court. Yet one of the founding principles of the youth justice provisions in Part 4 is: \u201Cthe principle that criminal proceedings should not be instituted against a child or young person solely in order to provide any assistance or services needed to advance the welfare of the child or young person, or his or her family, whanau, or family group:\u201D. Again, we are seeing an undermining of the essence of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EWe had a most extraordinary contribution from the previous speaker, Hekia Parata, who said that we should not care about the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child obligations. We have signed up to those, and I was absolutely astonished to hear that we have a member in this House who does not think that is important. In the entire time that we have been debating this bill in the House, not once did the Minister comment on the advice that she received on the challenge to our obligations under the convention that this measure will entail. Does it matter? The previous speaker said, no, it does not. I say, yes, it does. In fact, the Minister of Justice is currently amending the Adoption Act so that we can ratify the optional protocol to the United Nations convention on the rights of the child on the trafficking of children. It certainly matters to the Minister of Justice that we are able to ratify an optional protocol, but it does not matter to the Minister for Social Development and Employment that we are failing to meet our obligations under this convention in this most fundamental change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe Minister for Social Development and Employment said in her opening statement in the third reading\u2014and I think others would have heard it, as well\u2014that she accepted that this was a fundamental change in a law that was world-leading when it was passed in 1989. The irony is that this Government thinks that children who have grown up in the most appalling set of circumstances should simply be punished for their subsequent wrongdoing without addressing any of the underlying issues. That is why I say that there are always care and protection issues involved. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI have heard the Minister repeat the list of offences that will be covered by this change in jurisdiction from the Family Court to the Youth Court. Let me, again, make it clear that murder and manslaughter are already covered by the Youth Court jurisdiction. I think that we hear these different examples to try to put the numbers on the table. I ask the next Government speaker to please get up and tell us how many 12 and 13-year-olds have been charged with murder over the last few years. I am sorry, but I could not find it in any of the documentation associated with this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c88799e10eb48edbe11817f6956b22b\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not an evidence-based approach.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223fb5968707c544dd81c011d06f1114aa\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: It is not an evidence-based approach. Only once in the entire time that the Minister spoke\u2014and it was right at the tail end of her contribution in the third reading of this bill\u2014did she talk about the environment within which the children are brought up. The offending does not occur in a vacuum. I thought that, finally, we had an acknowledgment from the Minister that that is the case, but there is no ability to address the underlying drivers when we are talking about such young children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI asked the Minister a serious question during the Committee stage on this bill. She did not answer that question at all. It is a really horrible question to ask, because there is no comfortable answer. The question was that if Chris and Cru K\u0101hui had survived the attacks that they suffered in the very early days of their young lives, which were snuffed out so early, what would they have grown up to be like? What sort of adults would they have become if they had survived the brutality of their environment? What would they have become? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI am hearing from the other side of the House a sense of disquiet or discomfort about actually addressing the underlying drivers of crime. We know that those drivers are fundamental to how these children are able to see themselves as part of the world and as part of a community, and to what they are able to do in terms of responding to the challenges that they are confronted with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe ministerial Drivers of Crime meeting actually reinforced my very, very strong views that we need a collaborative approach across the House, so that when there is a change of Government\u2014as there is from time to time; it happens\u2014the non-governmental organisation sector is not thrown up in the air. The Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs was there and he will recall the number of non-governmental organisations that said that they are sick and tired of one thing coming in with one Government and then going out, and a new thing coming in with the next Government. It is time we actually dealt with this, and the public want us to do this collaboratively. That is why members on this side of the House made the offer to do so. The pilot we had been operating, Te Hurihanga, has been tossed out to be replaced with a programme that is not even ready to take its place. That is simply not good enough. That programme was designed to make the long-term difference to incredibly damaged children so that real change could occur. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThen we move to the boot camps. I think Jacinda Ardern nailed it when she said that the Government used the language of boot camps to garner public support, and then criticised everyone else because the public thought that boot camps were contained within the legislation. I have the Te Hurihanga evaluation and I have gone through the issues that it raises. It is not just about reoffending rates; it is about turning round the children\u2019s whole lives, which is quite a different model. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EChildren need strong adult role models in their lives. Children need to feel a strong sense of belonging. Children need to feel safe in their homes and in their communities. All children who offend have care and protection issues, and those issues must be addressed so that they can learn to take responsibility for their actions. It is hard to tell people to take responsibility for their actions when nobody intervened when they were being violently abused, raped, sodomised, and everything else that has happened to these young children who have ended up in this category. I would rather see us work collaboratively to make a difference in the lives of these children so that they grow up to be responsible members of our community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022 data-id=\u0022da9c01750ce54c14a4184f36f64960af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022da9c01750ce54c14a4184f36f64960af\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E Before I deliver the address prepared for this third reading, I acknowledge the work of colleagues in Labour\u2014Lianne Dalziel, Jacinda Ardern, and others\u2014whose contributions have been very valuable over the last week or so of debate on this bill. I reiterate my support for what has been said, and for their view. I think they have done a great job of expressing the concern of the community and, particularly, my concern on a number of issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EIt is with genuine sadness that we see the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill come before the House. It will cause children and their families considerable harm. The Green Party came to Parliament because its members want to look after our country; we want to look after its people and its place. We are here to make change for families\u2014for those families, in particular, who need us the most. This legislation will only damage those families and communities and, in fact, make our communities less safe. It should not be brought before the House or supported. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EI make it clear that the Greens recognise that this bill makes changes to the way that child offenders who commit the most serious crimes are dealt with. Although we oppose this legislation for the changes that it makes and its fundamental purpose, we do not in any way undervalue the significance of the loss and the harm that is caused by young offenders who commit very serious violent offences. These are often terrible crimes that can seriously damage or destroy whole families and whole communities, and they are always an awful tragedy. But this is why the Greens are so strong on issues around victims\u2019 rights, for example, and why the Green Party initiated the victims inquiry. It is why we have consistently argued for greater recognition of victims\u2019 rights and their voices in the legal process. It is why we have been so committed to restorative justice in particular, as opposed to the punitive approach of this Government, and the means by which that process gives back power to victims\u2014those who have been deprived of it by offenders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003ERestorative justice not only opens the justice process to victims of crime but directs the whole legal process towards a proven means that ensures that crime can be prevented. The truth is that we must invest our resources into preventing further crime. To do anything else is not only to waste scarce public funds but to waste human capability. It is a waste of our people. We cannot afford to continue to lose child after child, young person after young person, to the legal system, which causes them so much harm and keeps our communities unsafe. That itself is enough of a tragedy to shift the thinking. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThe Greens are most concerned that harm does not continue, and that as best as possible our legal system protects all children and their families. It is our view that the age of criminal responsibility should never go under 14\u2014there is a very good argument for increasing it\u2014and that there should be a much greater emphasis on establishing small-scale and dispersed youth rehabilitation centres in order to end the detention of young people in police cells and adult prisons, and to intensively address serious offending within a small-scale environment that can reflect their needs. Family group conferences are a key part of that process. The undermining and distortion of the family group conference process within this bill is greatly regretted. But we will strongly support marae-based Youth Court and youth justice programmes, and these should be increased. I acknowledge that there has been an extension to the Hoani Waititi Marae for Youth Court processes, which is great to see. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThe problem, of course, is that this bill fails all of our criteria. It is flawed at its core because the premise on which it is based is that 12 and 13-year-old children should be treated as young adults in criminal law for serious offending. That is simply wrong. I was very surprised to hear Hekia Parata undermine and dismiss the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The failure to address its core concerns was really quite surprising. The fact is that this bill is contrary to that convention. The bill attacks the child\u2019s right to be treated in accordance with his or her age. It undermines the ability of the child to be reintegrated into the community. It undermines any rehabilitation that might ensure that the child does not reoffend. The bill fails the family and the community by exacerbating the social exclusion of the child, and the inability then for that family to recover. The treatment of a child as young as 12 as a youth in the Youth Court will make our communities less safe, not more. Parliament is wasting precious time on the demonstrably failed boot camps ideology, which I am sure will go, given the chance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThe evidence proves that access to drug and alcohol rehabilitation and counselling, if it is extended both in breadth and in length of time, can resolve many of the violence and dysfunction issues faced by children and young people. Early intervention, as has been mentioned by Labour colleagues, is the key. But the Government is failing to close the gaps on the provision of these services. It is futile giving the Youth Court more powers to require young offenders to attend these programmes, because the places in them simply do not exist. The statement about millions and millions of dollars being invested is just wrong. There are not enough places to meet existing need, and there will not be enough places to meet ongoing need, because resources are being diverted into punitive action like boot camps rather than into those programmes that we know will work because they are proven to. No provisions in this legislation will be effective unless there are high-quality, best practice, and properly funded long-term services for young offenders. On that basis, it is with regret that we understand that Te Hurihanga has been closed down. That was a ridiculous decision to make. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThe evidence also proves that family focused services that treat the child within the context of the family will greatly maximise the chance for the reintegration of that child into family and community life. That surely has to be the goal\u2014not punishment and not punitive action, but reintegration and restoration of that child in their family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThirdly, we know that violence is more common in unequal societies. We know that incarceration leads to reoffending. The longer a person is incarcerated, the more likely they are to reoffend, and that is a fact. We know that the incarceration rate is greater in more unequal societies, and incarceration, frankly, includes boot camps. We know that unequal societies are more punitive in their approach. We know that child abuse is greater in more unequal societies. We know that children experience more bullying, fighting, and conflict in unequal societies. Inequity is at the heart of violence in New Zealand society, and New Zealand society has one of the highest rates of inequity in the developed world. We are not an egalitarian society. We are not an equal or fair society. Every day this Government moves us further and further from the ideal of being such a fair society, causing further harm and suffering to New Zealand\u2019s children and their families. The Government is choosing to ignore the roots of violence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219bcf2ff-a193-4361-9072-813a4e36683c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b55e8a86b9b84604b47660362f4582d8\u0022\u003EPeseta Sam Lotu-Iiga\u003C/span\u003E: Rubbish. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022844d0a183af144a589fb840c7667f3b8\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI\u003C/span\u003E: The member over there can say \u201CRubbish.\u201D, but he needs to look at the evidence. The evidence proves this country has one of the highest rates of inequity in the developed world, and inequity is the root cause behind social dysfunction, including violence, injury, and damage to children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EWe know that rangatahi will be the ones who suffer most from this legislation and the proposals of the Government. Rangatahi already suffer disproportionate punishment and degradation in the Youth Court. The judiciary has been very upfront in stating that rangatahi are more likely to attract harsher penalties for less serious criminal offending when they attend the Youth Court. We know that when children and young people move through the Youth Court into the adult system the bias against rangatahi and M\u0101ori is even greater, and that is proven and demonstrable. We know that the only way to deal with the offending of rangatahi is within the context of a tikanga approach within the wh\u0101nau, which is why we support so strongly marae-based processes for justice, Youth Court, and youth justice processes. In fact, this bill entrenches institutional racism. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022399169209cac4482af4c3847fc0b5323\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7e65111a1a1448fb3e9cc1e321c3ecc\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI\u003C/span\u003E: I know that National Party members will whinge about that, but it is true. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022edb2e2a4df784e1daa613699316fcb23\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That is a phrase that should not be used.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f6d8d68adc040fbb424ad592a31f8c3\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It has been a practice in this House that the use of the word racism to describe institutional issues or contextual issues is accepted, but not in any context where it is an attack on a person or a group of persons. I think that is the right approach to take. My comment was concerned with structural and institutional racism. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207c42ec090204629a9d5deaac006b018\u0022\u003EDr Rajen Prasad\u003C/span\u003E: I want to underscore that point, because institutional racism does not accuse any individual of anything. It refers just to a system that produces disproportional results, and that is a fact. That being so, it would be a travesty if we could not use a technical term to refer to what is a fact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c082846eb06747349bfdac5172db32b2\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. I refer the member to Speaker\u2019s ruling 42/3. The member Metiria Turei was right on the margin of using that phrase, and I ask that for the remainder of her speech she is very mindful of crossing that line. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce16010da6cb4303bb3ee4ec439f72a0\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It is really just a point of clarification. As I recall the reference by the member, she was criticising the bill as\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d061a4a9c494260bda2ddcdbb27f62c\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have ruled, and I am allowing her to continue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f481f203e3274c8c807549cb04a7036d\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am just trying to understand how her reference\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263237dad19894ed49d1ff91004cbd8c6\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I have already ruled, and I am allowing her to continue. I have said that she was right on the margin. I am allowing her to continue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff8e4e02e8ba475fadc5a512625e5a24\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI\u003C/span\u003E: In the last remaining moments I simply say the Green Party is opposed to this legislation. We are very disappointed that it has been pursued as far as it has. We are very pleased that there are other parties in this House\u2014the M\u0101ori Party and the Labour Party\u2014that oppose it. We hope to see real change in the very near future to protect our children, rather than punish and accuse them as this National Government is doing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022 data-id=\u002218ffebdb0b8f49dbb556d57b4619b2d5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002218ffebdb0b8f49dbb556d57b4619b2d5\u0022\u003EHon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader\u2014M\u0101ori Party):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113na koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. Last night I got an email about young people. That is not an unusual occurrence by any means, as we frequently receive comments about young people, often in association with criminal activity or youth unemployment. But this email was different. The writer felt sufficiently enthusiastic about our young people to take to her computer at 11 p.m. to tell us about the excitement she was witnessing at home amongst the iwi of Whakat\u014Dhea. She described the 10 projects that Whakat\u014Dhea have going, under Community Max, which have employed some 40 young people in their rohe. The rangatahi are involved in upgrading marae, developing community gardens, m\u0101ra kai, clearing tracks on maunga, restoring old p\u0101 sites, restoring whenua, and planting native trees and plants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EI will quote from the email to share the optimism that she feels for our youth: \u201CTo see the mana and confidence these young people show, they feel wanted and appreciated, they are contributing to our communities, they take on any training they need to help them to better their future. These are young people who believe that they are useless and no one cares. I am so proud of them, all the more so that our wh\u0101nau were able to employ them to make our marae and whenua a place to be proud of. This is the beginning of Wh\u0101nau Ora.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EI choose to bring these comments to the debate, as it is rare for our discussions in this House to make an explicit link between young people and pride, confidence, and mana. All too often, as indeed in the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill, we focus on problems of youth. In this bill the intention is unambiguous. It proposes tools to deal with the 1,000 or so serious offenders aged between 12 and 16 years. The young people who are the focus of this bill are mainly repeat offenders. Eighty percent of them are male, just over half of them are M\u0101ori, and the majority have left school or are near to leaving school. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EIn this Chamber we debate a range, a menu, of initiatives, including supervision and residence orders, treatment foster homes, lowering the jurisdiction of the Youth Court to include 12 to 13-year-olds, military-style activity camp programmes, electronic monitoring, and the like. The contribution I would like to make to the debate is to encourage us to take a broader perspective on those 1,000 young people. We need perspectives that provide us with an optimistic view to remind us of the potential of all our young people to plan proactively for our future. I was pleased that the Social Services Committee recommended amendments that specified, as for example in the issue of placing child offenders in residences, that the chief executive must consider all reasonable, practicable, less restrictive alternatives. But the general thrust of the bill remains to focus on a wide range of sentencing orders to be made for dealing with offenders. In doing so, it appears to ignore some of the strongest opposition from key submitters on the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EJudge Andrew Becroft, the Principal Youth Court Judge, described the proposal to include 12 to 13-year-olds within the youth justice system as \u201Cconstituting the most fundamental change to the system since its inception in 1989.\u201D Kim Workman from Rethinking Crime and Punishment encouraged Parliament to remember that the 1989 Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act has worked well, and that any amendment should not detract from its focus on treatment, rehabilitation, and restoration. Dr Cindy Kiro, the former Children\u2019s Commissioner, promoted the need to heed the research conclusions that the most effective responses are those that include a child or young person\u2019s family and wider community. That view was strongly supported by Jono Campbell, the manager of Te Ora Hau \u014Ctautahi. As the manager of the urban M\u0101ori youth organisation, he described this bill as being counterproductive to building strong communities, noting that it alienates wh\u0101nau, community, and collective responsibility, and will be particularly harmful for M\u0101ori. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThe youth justice area, as the House will be aware, is one of the most well-researched policy areas of debate. Dr Gabrielle Maxwell from the Institute of Policy Studies, right here in Wellington, concludes from her analysis of the research: \u201CIf you are going to make a difference in the lives of young people who have been abused and traumatised, it is necessary to provide them with close and sustained, supportive, pro-social relationships.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EShe also suggests that they will need education and skills to enable them to find their meaningful role in the community, and they will require help in dealing with any addiction problems. What we know is that prison, youth institutions, and boot camps are not a conducive environment for habilitation, rehabilitation, or restoration. It all depends on the quality of leadership that can embrace our young people: the connection that offenders can make to positively engage in change. We know that \u201Cgetting tough\u201D approaches do not work. Our young people need to be exposed to opportunities to learn new behaviour and values, to be taught new skills in active ways. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EAlthough it may be heresy to some, the leadership to inspire change can, in itself, come from ex-offenders who are committed to working with young people to reduce offending and reoffending. Examples of this include the Delancey Street Foundation in America, the Salisbury Street Foundation habilitation centre in Christchurch, and Moana House in Dunedin, which were all founded by ex-criminals. Yet the Government and officials all too often cannot accept that offenders have anything constructive to contribute towards preventing offending behaviour, preferring to see them as recipients of services and not people who have something to offer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EI go back to the recommendation from Dr Maxwell to focus on close and sustained supportive pro-social relationships as the key element of change, and I want to refer to that broader context of the situation for youth in Aotearoa. One of my key concerns for our young people is the lingering effects of the recession in relation to employment, in particular on the 15 to 19-year-old age group. M\u0101ori unemployment is approximately 1\u00BD times the non-M\u0101ori rate. For M\u0101ori youth, there is a twofold effect: the effect of being young, coupled with the fact that M\u0101ori unemployment is consistently higher than that of non-M\u0101ori. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EHow do we support these young people to continue to promote a situation of hopefulness and to focus on their future? We do that by reminding them of their connection to us\u2014that our collective aspirations include them and that they are worthy of work, that they are people whom we care about. During the select committee process, Manu Caddie from Te Ora Hou Aotearoa told the committee that the bill is focused on the individual and not enough on the wh\u0101nau community. It was the advice of Manu that funding for the very worst offenders might be better spent on strengthening communities to support their young people, rather than on ordering individuals to be mentored or counselled. Our focus should be on further investigating those interventions and programmes that are wh\u0101nau and family-based, that are effective based on evidence, and that represent value for money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThe 1989 Act stimulated the social sector to consider the centrality and importance of the wh\u0101nau to the care and protection of tamariki rangatahi and to youth justice. This bill, in focusing on individual strategies for individual youth, undermines the very intention of the overriding legislation, such as greater wh\u0101nau involvement in decision making and including hap\u016B and iwi in the plans and policies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori Party is very clear in our commitment to Wh\u0101nau Ora. We want to support communities to develop and implement their own solutions. As part of this, we require Government agencies to work with families and wh\u0101nau on issues affecting them. We are tired of servicing the symptoms; we want wh\u0101nau to be part of the direction forward, and we are unable to support this bill at its third reading. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022 data-id=\u0022b12a24c815814623b3389d7618dd2dbc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b12a24c815814623b3389d7618dd2dbc\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS (National\u2014Whanganui):\u003C/span\u003E I will start with a few comments about the process that the Social Services Committee went through. Although it was a fairly heated debate at times and colourful at other times, what was quite overwhelming was that the committee agreed on a number of things. I am sure that each member of the committee engaged in a positive way, albeit we were not free from politics. Given that it was a parliamentary select committee, no one should be surprised by that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EIt is also important to note the history of the legislation that the bill amends. The Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 replaced the Children and Young Persons Act 1974. The drafting of that legislation included the responsibility to deal with families. When the legislation was written, it was a world first. Funnily enough, it was written in the same year that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child was written. It seems unusual to me that the Government of the day, in drafting the bill and being aware of what the convention entailed, did not include within it the provisions that the Opposition seems so drastically to want today. The fact is that, around the world, different jurisdictions classify the various ages of people appearing before their criminal jurisdictions in different ways. A person who is legally a child in New Zealand might be a young person in another country, or an adult in yet another country. If we look at all the countries that are signatories to the convention, we will see things interpreted in different ways. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EIt does not mean that with the benefit of hindsight we would not go back and change some stuff. For instance, I do not believe for a moment that, given the opportunity to go back, Labour would not have made some significant changes\u2014changes that it is actually voting against in this bill\u2014soon after 1990, when it was elected to Government. In fact, Labour set about making a number of those changes in a piece of legislation that is still on the Order Paper, as I understand it, and that the Green Party was supporting. It does things like extend the term of supervision with activity and supervision with residence. This is in spite of the fact that we have just heard the Green Party member Metiria Turei complain that incarceration for longer terms can only be a bad thing. Legislation that the Green Party was supporting in the last two elections did pretty much what this Government is doing in terms of those sorts of sentences. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EWe also have to remember that under this legislation the number of young people aged 12 and 13 who will appear in the Youth Court will probably be fewer than 100, based on current statistics. Those statistics not only come from the ministry but also have been given to us by the Youth Court. The person who will make the decision whether the 12 or 13-year-old appearing in the Youth Court\u2014the child\u2014will continue down the track within the Youth Court is the judge. The person who has been applauded the most by both sides of the House\u2014we all want to grab hold of his every word and glue it on to our policy statement\u2014is the Principal Youth Court Judge, Andrew Becroft. It is within his jurisdiction, and by judges acting under his direction, that the decision will be made whether that 12 or 13-year-old has offended in such a way that he or she should continue through the Youth Court and access the provisions of this legislation, or whether he or she should go back to the Family Court and be dealt with in that way. It is very, very important to remember that those judges are the people who are making that decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EI have another interesting point. The Opposition has raised and protested against only a very small number of things. The Opposition actually supports longer terms for supervision with activity and supervision with residence, which is in effect what our Fresh Start camp is, but with further wraparound services\u2014and the Opposition supports that as well. It supports the removal of the consent required for community service orders. The only problem the Opposition really has is with the use of the term \u201Cmilitary-style activity camp\u201D, and with the provisions relating to 12 and 13-year-olds. The Labour Government accepted that there needed to be closer supervision and a closer look at the impact of programmes on people after they had finished a residential sentence. But Labour has not said that if it were returned to Government, it would turn this back. It has not said that when Labour is next in Government it would unwind this measure and undo it. It does not say that. It knows that it supports the bulk of this stuff. It is only those two provisions that it does not like. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EThe fact is\u2014and I take issue with the previous speaker, Pita Sharples\u2014that this legislation includes parents, family, and wh\u0101nau far more than they have been included to date. This legislation is actually a step towards where the M\u0101ori Party would have us be in terms of inclusion and in terms of getting some semblance of Wh\u0101nau Ora operating within the criminal justice system. I accept and applaud the fact that the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 took that process a long way down the track\u2014far further than it ever had been under the previous legislation. A lot of us cynical cops at the time were absolutely convinced that it was going to fail, and I am absolutely convinced that it did not fail. The only problem with the provisions it instilled within our youth justice system reaching their full potential was that a lot of cynical policemen and women out there did not apply it in the way that it could have been applied, because it took too much paperwork and it was too cumbersome to deal with in a speedy and timely manner. Young 12 and 13-year-olds who should have been appearing in the Family Court, and who should have had their care and protection issues dealt with, because their offending displayed a need to do that, never made it there, and that was because of the attitude of practitioners operating in the field. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EI also supported the separation between care and protection social workers and youth justice social workers that the previous Government implemented to try to deal with exactly that situation. When people sit in the Youth Court, as I have sat in the Youth Court, they see young person after young person appear before the court, only to have their cases put off again because the social workers who are in charge of case-managing the proceedings before the court have not done the notifications that they should have done. All of that eroded the confidence and the trust that people had in the youth justice system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EThis legislation shifts responsibilities towards parents, but it does not cut them adrift and hold them solely responsible. It has the ability to hold parents accountable for their children\u2019s offending, and so they should be. I am proud of this legislation. I thank the people on the select committee who worked towards it, and those who worked against it. Thank you for their engagement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022 data-id=\u002293660fb9b48b41d69e0a4132f0070a44\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293660fb9b48b41d69e0a4132f0070a44\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E In coming to Parliament, after doing most things that I had wanted to do, I expected and looked for those rare opportunities when I could sit down and really work, across parties, on solutions to fundamental problems of concern to our society. I liken it to having spent most of my professional life pulling bodies out of the river, but one day deciding to go upstream and work with people to build fences so that people did not fall into the river. This Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill was an opportunity to begin to address some of the concerns that Government members had, and for all members to try to work our way through the legislation to address those questions and come up with a set of solutions with which we could engage in a productive kind of way. My sadness is that that opportunity has been missed, because members on only one side have been trying to do that. When members on the other side are constantly trying to focus on political capital\u2014making political capital out of the situation\u2014it becomes very hard. I will talk about that more as I go on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003ELabour, by its record since the change in Government, has always supported reasonable legislation to address fundamental problems. Labour members have always taken an optimistic view on that, but when I came from the select committee, and into the legislative process that is almost at an end now, the feeling I had was that here was a Government juggernaut that had already made up its mind and that was disregarding any advice that could be put before it. It was determined to go down a particular track; I likened that to a punitive approach. Somehow in the process leading up the election\u2014the pre-election campaign\u2014there was this notion that the only response was to be much harder on crime, through every level. Of course, there was the action of 100 days, which came into the select committee hearings, as well, but the juggernaut prevented us from taking the opportunity to develop this set of proposals in a far more constructive way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EI have a lot of respect for every member of the select committee. The committee was very ably chaired, and every member of the select committee really struggled to engage with the issues and with the submitters. But in the end, I had the impression that National committee members were prevailed upon not to follow what the select committee was being advised but to deliver on what was a punitive approach to the legislation. Chester Borrows, as well, has talked about how an opportunity was missed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EThe bit that Labour members have major difficulties with in this particular bill is the ideology driving it. That ideology is a punitive ideology, and it automatically leads us somewhere. No matter what safeguards we write into the bill, over time those who interpret the provisions will begin to internalise that particular ideology. There is a lot of legislation where that is the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003ETwo days ago, Unicef New Zealand put out a press statement. That organisation is a group of people who are concerned about young people, and who think about New Zealand society quite a bit. The organisation makes reasoned statements from time to time. Its New Zealand executive director says: \u201CThe Bill is a backward step in the treatment of children who commit serious crimes.\u201D Indeed, that is Labour\u2019s view, but this is a large, credible organisation that is making these comments. Its statement continues: \u201CLowering the age at which children can enter into the realm of criminal jurisdiction takes New Zealand in the opposite direction to that proposed by international and national experts on criminality and human rights.\u201D My good friend Pita Sharples has articulated that far more comprehensively than I could ever imagine, and I tell the Minister that he is absolutely right. Indeed, all of the advice that he has talked about advises us to go in the other direction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EThe select committee was going in the opposite direction. It is no wonder that the debate in the second reading, the Committee stage, and this third reading has been quite tetchy. It is because the opportunity has been missed and the advice has not been taken, at all. The bill really is about lost opportunities for the Government to address what it saw as problems with young offenders. It is almost as if the kind of bravado that the Minister displays from time to time in the House has driven the thing this far, but members of the Government in the select committee have not been able to let loose and begin to think their way through it. They are all honourable members, and they all have good brains they could have used to come up with much better amendments than the ones here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EOn this side of the House, I say that some provisions in the bill have our support. Extending orders and giving the Youth Court more orders are not things we dispute, at all. However, the way is also opened up for orders that have been known to fail elsewhere. There is any amount of evidence on that. I have not heard the Minister or speakers from the Government side tell us the evidence on which they have built their set of proposals. An ideological position has led the provisions, not substantive research or examples from national or international experiences that say: \u201CThis was achieved.\u201D I refer of course to boot camps, which come in under the \u201CSupervision with activity order\u201D substituted in clause 25.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EWhere is the evidence for the camps\u2019 success? Why was the evidence not put before us? The signal given was that the Government\u2019s analysis is that all that is missing in the lives of these young people is discipline, and once we give them discipline through military-style boot camps and activities, then we set them, with wraparound services, on the right path. But there is no evidence to suggest that that will come through boot camps. Members have heard the Hon Pita Sharples tell us very clearly that a whole series of complex factors work in consort one with the other\u2014many around family, many around community, and many to do with age and other things\u2014and need to be put together. Proper services that brought all those factors together would have been much more effective. So those are the lost opportunities, which is why this bill is disappointing for me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EPerhaps the one aspect that has bothered us more than anything else has been the sending of children to the jurisdiction of the Youth Court, because that also signals and is consistent with the Government\u2019s ideological position on punitive treatments. The problem with that, I say to the Minister, is the question of what happens when the issue is about 11 year-olds. What will happen when it is about 10 year-olds? Pressure will come on us, but I do not see that this legislation will produce dramatic change over the time of this particular Government. It will not. We will still be talking about the cases we have heard about today; members opposite have been talking about very recent ones. In the end we will force ourselves to become more punitive, and to push the age of criminal responsibility further back, but those positions are really unprincipled. It was really important for us to hear from the Minister what her deeply held philosophical belief was around children. It was really important for us to hear that and for her to put that on the record of the House. But that has been missing. At least if we had heard that, there might have been a difference in the discussions. But the Government has been arrogant and has not listened to experts, and the legislation is disappointing and a lost opportunity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EPerhaps the final point is that it is surprising that Government members who have spoken have really demonstrated the limits of their understanding of the complex issues around this particular\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022904643279c6a4882b5bd7bda4038d9b8\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the member; his time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022 data-id=\u002247646f8118484ec8bf2f7483c842d2e2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002247646f8118484ec8bf2f7483c842d2e2\u0022\u003ETIM MACINDOE (National\u2014Hamilton West):\u003C/span\u003E Tonight\u2019s debate is a milestone because it completes the enactment of the Government\u2019s major commitments to New Zealanders at the 2008 general election. But it is even more significant because it demonstrates once again the resolve of a Government that cares enough about troubled youths to want to break their cycle of delinquency and crime and give them a fresh start and a brighter future. It is a Government that cares about communities that have had enough of selfish and unacceptable behaviour by a worrying number of young people who are running amok in this country. I say to Dr Prasad that it is a Government that is facing up to the considerable evidence that the current system is not working and has to be fixed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003ELabour members\u2019 solution of more of the same demonstrates that they have learnt nothing from their comprehensive rejection at the last election. Opposition members claim to be concerned about these young people but they have consistently and deliberately misrepresented the key provisions of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill and ignored the seriousness of the issues it is designed to tackle. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003EIn my electorate of Hamilton West we have at Hamilton\u2019s Fraser High School one of the oldest and most respected school cadet schemes. It is, if anything, growing in popularity. Fraser\u2019s cadet corps teaches its students discipline, values, and respect. It gives those young people a sense of purpose, builds their self esteem, and encourages them to aim high in other aspects of school and community life as well. Just last week some Fraser High School students who admitted that they were at risk of going off the rails asked to be signed up. I am very proud to represent Fraser High School in this House and I ask members to reflect on what that school and its cadet scheme are achieving. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003EI mention that scheme because those benefits are exactly what military-style activity camps will offer the young offenders who are the focus of this bill. I am very disappointed that Opposition members of the Social Services Committee continue to parrot the dishonest \u201Cboot camp\u201D slogan when they know that their imagery is dishonest and irresponsible. Worse, it insults the fine men and women who are already offering programmes of this nature with great success around New Zealand and those who will lead the new military training activities provided for in this bill. I know they will do it well, yet Opposition members would prefer to denigrate those people by conjuring up irrelevant images of screaming and abusive drill sergeants from B-grade American movies. That is offensive. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003EMiss Dalziel talked earlier about a disservice, yet she overlooked the irony that her party is doing a huge disservice to the people of New Zealand, and especially the young people who are off the rails, by demeaning and opposing the intent of this bill. Mr Nash lamented the fact that some of our young people are being labelled criminals when they may be just 12 or 13 years of age. We are talking here about young arsonists, young aggravated robbers, and young home invaders. These are serious crimes and I say to Labour members that people who commit crimes are criminals whether they are 13 or 93 years of age. It is sanctimonious claptrap for Labour members to deny that these young people are already on a dangerous path to a lifetime of serious adult offending. They are not innocent and they need our determined intervention. Worse, it is actually heartless of Labour members to say we should not tackle the issues because to do so would damage the self-esteem of our country\u2019s most serious young offenders. I did not know Harry Holland but I am confident that he would tell Stuart Nash that such politically correct puffery is just not right. The package of measures in this bill confronts the reality of New Zealand in 2010; not the mythical Peter Pan dreamland that exists in the minds of members opposite but not in a single town anywhere in this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003EWe are talking about mentoring that is tried and tested. It works in my city and it will be extended under this bill. We are talking about drug and alcohol rehabilitation programmes that will be essential if many young offenders are to have any chance of breaking out of the damaging environment and lifestyle that so many of them have known for far too long. These programmes are not heartless or offensive to young people, but failing to tackle those problems certainly is. Actually, the words \u201Cheartless\u201D and \u201Coffensive\u201D better describe Labour\u2019s approach to this whole debate. It is offering nothing new, and nothing that deals with the magnitude and reality of the problem, and it would rather stick with the status quo despite the overwhelming evidence around the country that the current system is just not working. Ignoring the plight of serious young offenders does a disservice, to use Miss Dalziel\u2019s word, to those young people, to their families and wh\u0101nau, to their victims\u2014who, members may have noticed, have been conspicuously missing from any consideration by Labour\u2019s speakers this evening\u2014and to New Zealanders who suffer day in and day out from the consequences of juvenile delinquency in their communities. We are talking about parenting education to give those young people the skills they will desperately need when many of them become parents while still not much older than children themselves. Without that commitment we condemn their offspring to a future just as bleak, and I am 100 percent sure, I say to Mr Nash, that Harry Holland would say that that just would not be right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003EThis bill is appropriate. It is realistic and it is compassionate in the manner of tough love initiatives. It reflects the commitment of the Minister for Social Development and Employment and of this Government to doing much better by our troubled youth and all who care for them or live with the consequences of their behaviour. That is why I am proudly supporting this bill and that is why I am confident that it will make a positive difference in one of our most challenging areas of social policy. With the passing of this bill we will give our Youth Court the tools it needs to tackle one of our country\u2019s most serious challenges.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002237dbf1fdeaa4043399faebf13bbc09d69001312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 12 midnight to 9 a.m. (Thursday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002229c23041130342ecbd74edc259a81055\u0022\u003ETuesday, 23 February 2010\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cc01bd7e48034847990cd70259aacb54\u0022\u003E(continued on Thursday, 25 February 2010)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022355bb388f9a0424e92bbe16d022534cb\u0022\u003EBusiness of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d535fc8f4b564f88b25bff9e9e8d9df5\u0022\u003EBusiness of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00225ce244230b9c47cca903877a3f58a574\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ce244230b9c47cca903877a3f58a574\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave for there to be a question time today at 2 p.m., with questions being lodged by parties at the Office of the Clerk by 10.30 a.m. this morning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e72405c319c4a5486dbf001d6b05d89\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00221bc1af542e9a4176bbfd8df50fb701d2\u0022\u003EChildren, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022551ffcae61f248aaadb3f7ed7f420f63\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000009\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9131e2474244dd0a43e63dbdc51509a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9131e2474244dd0a43e63dbdc51509a\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am disappointed to hear that the member for Hamilton West did not take his remaining 2 minutes to speak, because I was waiting for an apology. I was waiting for him to say sorry to the people of Hamilton and, in fact, to the people of New Zealand for standing by while the very best facility that we have had to date to deal with high-risk offenders has been closed down by his Government in his back yard\u2014in Hamilton. Yet during the member\u2019s whole speech last evening, not one mention was made of Te Hurihanga. Perhaps the member is embarrassed, and rightly so. He should be embarrassed that his Government is flying in the face of the good people of Hamilton. It is flying in the face of two Hamilton bishops\u2014the Anglican Archbishop, David Moxon, and the Catholic Bishop, Denis Browne\u2014who have both come out to criticise the Government about this very bad decision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EIf the Government was truly serious about dealing with youth crime and helping to turn angry young men\u2019s lives around, then it would continue to invest in the Te Hurihanga model. Te Hurihanga is now a proven model. It had been piloted for 3 years in Hamilton, and the assessment was glowing about the results it had achieved with those very high-risk offenders. For people who are not aware of that model, I say that it took in young men who had committed, on average, 23 offences before they had even stepped inside the facility. That was the high level of offending, and we know from research and evidence\u2014which the Government ignores, at its peril\u2014that it is the small number, the minority of hardened offenders who cause the majority of grief in our community and our society. That is why Te Hurihanga is so important. It was dealing with the hardened, high-risk youth offenders, and it was achieving success. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EYet this Government today, in urgency, is pushing through a bill to go back to a failed model. It is almost like having the McGillicuddy Serious Party as the Government. Talk about the great leap backwards! This is the great leap backwards: back to boot camps, and back to a situation that we know does not work. We have research and evidence that proves that it does not work here in New Zealand; we have tried it. It does not work overseas; it has been tried overseas. This Government is going for the great leap backwards to something that does not work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI want to know from the Government\u2014I still have not heard anything from the Government members, and I will not, as this is the last call on this bill; they have studiously avoided this question\u2014what will replace the Te Hurihanga model in Hamilton. There we have a custom-built facility\u2014an eight-bed facility\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221d9364b5cbe41ae8f3b215dc4833ca2\u0022\u003ETim Macindoe\u003C/span\u003E: The facility is remaining open. Child, Youth and Family is taking it over. You know that\u2014it\u2019s all publicly available. The whole thing has been announced.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229225c674e3d94aee8a9bbdadbb7ebc68\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: The member seems to know, but he has not told the Hamilton community what will be replacing it. I ask Mr Macindoe whether it will be a 12-month programme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e732725e6dad4363ba1296b2d6fc342b\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Not a word!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d0267c4e57743b297a2eda091211e2f\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: No, he does not know. He does not know, and neither does the Hamilton community. I ask Mr Macindoe whether it will be a 6-month programme. I ask the Minister for Social Development whether it will be a 6-month programme. They do not know. They have closed down this successful programme\u2014an 18-month comprehensive wraparound programme\u2014and they are trying to convince the country and Hamiltonians that they will do exactly that same programme, but they will do it for about a third of the cost. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EMembers of the Hamilton community are not dumb. They know that that programme cannot be delivered for $40,000 per offender. They have been told it will cost only $40,000 per offender. Currently, the Ministry of Justice says that the programme the Government has cut was costing about $170,000 per offender. That has been a very contentious issue. The Ministers have tried to inflate that figure and say that it cost $600,000 per offender. The Government\u2019s own ministry, the Ministry of Justice, says otherwise. So who is telling the truth? Well, I would go to the Ministry of Justice website to see who is telling the truth. It is costing $170,000 per offender, and that is a fantastic investment in stopping crime in our country, and in particular in my city of Hamilton. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe Government\u2014in its short-sighted, uncaring way\u2014has come to that community and completely disempowered it. I tell members that nothing is more disempowering for a community than to completely embrace a programme\u2014even the people who opposed its being set up in the first place\u2014and then have to fight the Government to keep it in place. Even though some people opposed the programme in the beginning, they now know that it works. They have seen the results in their community and for those young men, and they have turned their opinion around. But has the Government turned its opinion around? No way. That community has supported the programme\u2014has put its heart and soul into it\u2014and now an uncaring, unthinking, unfeeling Government has come along, against all the research and evidence, and said that it will not have that programme, because we are going to have boot camps. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EWhy are we going to have boot camps? It is because it made for a great bumper sticker slogan during the election campaign. That is the reason; there is no research or evidence for it. In fact, the research and evidence shows otherwise. Once again I find myself in this House\u2014as I have on many occasions, and over many other pieces of legislation in respect of this Government\u2014asking where the research is. Where is the evidence? What is the Government basing this decision on? The Government is not listening. Not only is it not listening to what I am trying to impress upon it, but also it is not listening to the Hillcrest community in Hamilton. It is not just the Hillcrest community. If Tim Macindoe thinks that this will not be an issue in his area, then he should talk to the Methodists, he should talk to the Catholics, and he should talk to the Anglicans, and he should take heed of what they are saying. They are interested in social justice, and they are interested in finding a true way forward. That member and his Government are more interested in bumper sticker slogans that will just turn into plasters over wounds. That is what will happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThis legislation is putting us in the predicament of having the Te Hurihanga programme close in June\u2014mind you, it will not if the Hamilton community has its way, because it is in fight-back mode against this Government. It is in fight-back mode.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad0996eac9ff4953a7b4a6f2006ae92d\u0022\u003ETim Macindoe\u003C/span\u003E: No evidence of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e90003458bea417b95f881c13fe2d923\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: Tim Macindoe says he has not heard that Hamilton is in fight-back mode. Where has he been? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI congratulate Karyn Knight, a woman who lives in Fairfield who has started up a petition. When she came to see me for some advice and asked me to receive the petition and table it in the House for her, I told her that I absolutely would, because I firmly believe that the Government has made the wrong decision. I was interested in what her motivation might be, so I asked her why she was doing this and whether she was a staff member at the facility, and whether a family member had gone through it. When I asked her what her vested interest was, she told me that she had no involvement with that facility, but that she just thought people deserved a second chance. That is the type of sentiment that this Government should be listening to\u2014not to bumper sticker slogans, but to things that actually work. It should be listening to real people\u2019s sentiments and programmes that the research and evidence\u2014the Government\u2019s own research and evidence, and the assessment that it paid for\u2014show work with our most hardened offenders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI think it is extremely shallow that all those members opposite have got up and said that they want to stop youth crime. If they really wanted to stop youth crime, they would not be closing down Te Hurihanga and they would not be passing this bill. I am very proud to be part of a party in this Parliament that is opposing this shallow bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022 data-id=\u0022ef21f7c630ad4dd6919707f4bb1f100e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ef21f7c630ad4dd6919707f4bb1f100e\u0022\u003ETODD McCLAY (National\u2014Rotorua):\u003C/span\u003E Good morning to my colleagues and to members opposite. As I was sitting having a good breakfast after a great night\u2019s sleep, I thought that all members might be in the same mood that I am in this morning, but it is obvious from that last speech that some members in this House did not sleep as well as others. I would like to briefly thank a number of my colleagues, and, in particular, the Minister for Social Development and Employment, for bringing the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill to the House so quickly after the election, for supporting the Social Services Committee in its work, and for speaking so clearly about youth in New Zealand in all stages of this debate. Certainly, yesterday the Minister spoke many times during the Committee stage and now during the third reading. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EI want to recognise other colleagues on my side of the House who worked on this policy when we were in Opposition. Anne Tolley certainly worked very hard on this, as did Chester Borrows. Chester Borrows, a member of Parliament whom I respect greatly, has 20 years of experience as a policeman in our community, working with the very young people whom members opposite were so quick to disregard during their term in office. Can I say\u2014as I did during the second reading when Chester Borrows told the House that this bill will make a difference to young people\u2014that I back what he said and I accept it fully. I would listen to Chester Borrows any day of the week before I would listen to a single member on the other side of the House, as members opposite often have opinions but cannot back them up. I want also to recognise members of the select committee, and the officials who worked very diligently for us over the last year. I thank submitters also. We heard from a wide range of submitters who had an opportunity to put their views\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296cff9a37fbc4361a4f8afd3b7e9d08b\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: And they weren\u2019t listened to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3474591a4fa44f9974b5dd9a75cadcc\u0022\u003ETODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E:\u2014and they were listened to. We had great discussions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EI will be very brief during this call, because this is the last speech in the debate, and Parliament is about to pass this bill. On 1 October the bill will come into effect. The bill will make a number of changes, and it will make a number of changes for the 1,000 worst youth offenders in New Zealand. The last speaker for the Opposition said that a small number of hardened offenders cause most of the problems in our society. I agree with her\u2014but, guess what? There are not just 1,000. Every year those young people who commit crimes and get into trouble reach the age of 17, and they go on to fill up our adult prisons. Every year younger people start committing crimes, and those 1,000 young people stay in the group. What has happened over the last 9 years is that that group of 1,000 young people has grown, so it is about time the House took this issue seriously and did more to help these young people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EThe bill will expand the jurisdiction of the Youth Court to include 12 and 13-year-olds. This will enable the Youth Court to play a greater role in the support and rehabilitation of 12 and 13-year-olds who commit the most serious crimes. We are actually giving out a very important and very serious duty and power to the Youth Court. We heard from some submitters that there is concern that the Family Court had options available to it that the Youth Court would not have. Well, guess what? The bill was changed so that a judge in the Youth Court can decide, without intervention from others\u2014members opposite or anybody else in this Parliament\u2014whether a child should remain in that court or should be sent back to the Family Court. I have listened to the judges, I have respect for them, and I think that is an appropriate measure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EThe bill will also strengthen the Youth Court and expand its powers to give a new range of compulsory orders, including parenting education. I would guess that the vast majority of the young kids who are getting into trouble and continuing to get into trouble from very early ages until they reach the age of 17 do not have family backgrounds that are the same as members in this House. I would guess that they do not have parents who spend enough time with them or care for them, and therefore parenting orders, to be directed by the court, are a very good step in the direction of ensuring that parents realise that they have greater responsibility. Also provided are mentoring and drug and alcohol treatment programmes, which are very important, as we very clearly know that there are children who have problems with drugs and alcohol. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EI have heard about military style camps, and this legislation will bring in such camps in order to bring respect and discipline to some of our worst repeat youth offenders. These camps are the most intensive intervention that there is in the bill, and are intended to help get the lives of youth offenders back on track before they reach the age of 18 and end up in our prisons. There is also an option for longer supervision with residence; residence can increase from 3 months to 6 months, and supervision can be up to 12 months. Another option is longer supervision with activity, which is 6 months of activity and another 6 months of supervision. There will be more intensive monitoring. This is not just about children going before the Youth Court. It is also about judges being able to keep an eye on them. There is provision in the bill for electronic monitoring for repeat offenders and those who breach community orders. There is also judicial monitoring. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EI want to conclude so we can move on to other business, but can I say to members opposite and to people listening this morning that we are not talking about young people who lead ideal lives. We are not talking about young people who have strong family support and backgrounds, or supportive parents. We are talking about young people who have started on the path to serious repeat offending, and we are talking about young people who are on a path directly to prison if the State does not intervene and give them more support. This bill gives those young people a chance, and, in some cases, a last chance. I support it fully. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226155e57e54c64a45aa272ebe0d53fbce\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022040973bc8016415b8098704d56876d7f\u0022\u003EJudicial Matters Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c6554ce11bb74d81826e6ac646f218fb\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022871d756e1b8b4738a3945a7d26cf6d11\u0022\u003EPart 1  Amendments to Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act 2004\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022dead4e2297884c47a7abbdc04f3440b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dead4e2297884c47a7abbdc04f3440b7\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General):\u003C/span\u003E Perhaps I should make a few preliminary comments before Mr Chauvel makes a contribution. The main changes in Part 1 deal with the creation of the position of deputy commissioner. This person, as with the commissioner, will be appointed on the nomination of the House. The Attorney-General is required to consult the Chief Justice about the proposed appointment, and the deputy commissioner will act when the commissioner has a conflict of interest or is otherwise unavailable to examine complaints. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EThe provisions as reported back from the Justice and Electoral Committee are unchanged from the bill as introduced. There are, however, a couple of changes, which are set out on Supplementary Order Paper 108. They relate to disposal of complaints, and they are designed to give the commissioner a greater ability or a greater discretion to deal with complaints in a particular way. There are minor amendments to section 15 and consequential amendments to sections 16 and 17.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u00227943236c8f664292903703ff72499772\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227943236c8f664292903703ff72499772\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I would like the Minister in the chair, the Attorney-General, to amplify the comments he has just made about the Judicial Matters Bill. One of the issues that Labour has with regard to this legislation is that although Labour is supportive of the substantive provisions\u2014as we originally advised during the first reading, and as was our position at the Justice and Electoral Committee\u2014it is of concern that the changes proposed on Supplementary Order Paper 108 in the name of the Hon Chris Finlayson are significant. Perhaps that is not so much the case in respect of the amendments to clauses10(1), 11, 12, and 12A. I can see that the Minister would want to characterise those amendments as being machinery changes. I imagine that he will tell the Committee that those amendments are improvements that have been made on reflection and on the advice of officials following the select committee process. But I think it would be helpful if we were to have a little more explanation of why these changes are being introduced by means of a Supplementary Order Paper rather than through the normal process, even if they are relatively minor. Indeed, the changes may well be improvements. If they are, and if the Attorney-General can enlighten us as to why that is, it may well be that we will support those parts of them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI do, though, foreshadow a concern about the other matters that are proposed to be dealt with on that Supplementary Order Paper. They are more substantive matters, but they do not relate to this part, so I will not speak to them substantively. I do foreshadow to the Attorney-General that we have a concern about bringing them in, in particular at this late stage, without the scrutiny of a select committee or debate. That is a matter to which I will return. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe other thing that would, I think, be useful to the Committee, while members have the benefit of the presence of the Attorney-General as the Minister in the chair, would be for the Attorney-General go back over the general philosophy of his party relating to the Office of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner. It is the case that, as he acknowledged in his first reading speech, initially the National Party opposed this office. I think in Chris Finlayson\u2019s second reading speech on this bill we heard from him that that position had changed, but we did not really hear why it had changed. Given the vehemence of the comments that came from him and his colleagues when the original measure came to the House, it would be helpful if we were to get that sort of explanation. I remind the Attorney-General that at the time of the original proposal for the creation of the office he said: \u201CThis bill will not be supported by the National Party. The material dealing with the Deputy Judicial Conduct Commissioner is as misconceived as the contents of the substantive legislation.\u201D Not only the amendment but also the whole notion of this process\u2014this backstop measure; this measure of confidence\u2014was something that National stood against. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI think it would be helpful for the Committee to be given an explanation of National\u2019s change of position, given the relatively scant recantation that, shall we say, occurred at the second reading debate, and given the substantive policy reversal that we now see. We are pleased about that. We do support the primary legislation, as I have said. We think this is a useful measure to encourage confidence in the judiciary, and we are delighted that the National Party has changed its mind and the Minister is now progressing with this legislation, which began its life as a Labour measure. But given the vehemence with which National originally opposed the legislation, given that we have not had a real explanation for its change of heart, and also given that we have not really had the new provisions proposed in this part explained to us in any way, or described in terms of how they are a correct and proper improvement, it would be good to hear substantively from the Minister on those points.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022adb60e795fd5468799a34473b4aa8623\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022adb60e795fd5468799a34473b4aa8623\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General):\u003C/span\u003E The member Charles Chauvel raises a couple of substantive points that are worthy of reply. The first relates to the alleged call on the road-to-Damascus change of view. There was a real concern on the part of my party about interference with the conduct of the judiciary. Having spoken, however, to the Chief Justice and other members of the judiciary, we found they were of the opinion that after a couple of years their initial concerns had evaporated and they felt that the post was relieving the heads of benches of numerous complaints that tended to be made and that there was a filtering system that was put in place. On that basis we were prepared to change our minds. Changing one\u2019s mind is not necessarily a sign of weakness; it can often be a sign of strength, I say to Mr Chauvel. What we are now seeking to do is to ensure that the commissioner is not placed under a huge burden with the number of complaints that are being lodged these days. Sometimes, inevitably, as the member will know, in a relatively small jurisdiction there will be conflicts of interest or other reasons why the commission is unable to deal with the matter. That is why it is proposed that there be a deputy judicial complaints officer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EAs the member would know, because he was in partnership with the commissioner Sir David Gascoigne, for example, a number of the member\u2019s and Sir David\u2019s former partners have been appointed to the bench, and it would be rather difficult for the commissioner to have to deal with any complaints against those judges. That is why, having listened to the judiciary and having listened to submissions on the part of the Law Society, the Government, or the National Party, was prepared to change its mind. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EI come to the other point the member raised. If the member looks at section 15 of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act 2004, one sees that the commission is required to conduct a preliminary examination of a complaint and then the commissioner\u2014if one looks at subsection (4)\u2014may make inquiries into the complaint that he thinks is appropriate, obtain documents, and consult the head of bench. Then in subsection (5), having completed the preliminary examination, the commissioner may take certain steps. The commissioner can dismiss the complaint, refer it to the head of bench, or recommend the appointment of a judicial conduct panel. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003ECommissioners have found that for some complaints a complainant can be satisfied following an explanation or an apology by the judge. What normally happens, as I understand it, is the commissioner will write to the judge who is the subject of complaint and ask for at least a preliminary response. Then on the basis of that there may, for example, be an apology, and that could be considered to be the end of the matter. The new section enables the commissioner not to take further action in respect of a complaint if the commission is satisfied that further consideration of the complaint would in all the circumstances be unjustified. It is really just giving the commissioner additional powers in order to deal with the matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00228edfb88a214f4f999e7d22b162e1a3a9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228edfb88a214f4f999e7d22b162e1a3a9\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I want to speak on this part of the Judicial Matters Bill, not to make an enormous substantive contribution, but to ask the Attorney-General whether he thinks this is the sort of legislation that should be passed under urgency or whether this is the sort of legislation that should be carefully considered. There is a degree of agreement, certainly around this part of it, and one that has developed over a period of time; we think that is good. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe question I have is whether the Minister, as Attorney-General, thinks it is good lawmaking practice to ram this sort of legislation through the House under urgency. The House is sitting under urgency, and there is chaos. There was a point of order yesterday that took about one and a half question times\u2014just for one point of order. The House has not been well organised. The Attorney-General, as the chief legal officer of Parliament, has responsibility, along with the Leader of the House, for process. The process under which this legislation is being addressed is shambolic, and I want to know what responsibility he is taking for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI want to know whether the Attorney-General has advised the Leader of the House that in taking this approach to this bill, which it is fair to say is constitutional in its approach, it is one that should properly be dealt with under urgency or, using the words of Steven Joyce at the Cabinet table, \u201Cwhether the optics are good about this or not.\u201D \u201CAre the optics of this good?\u201D, I ask the Attorney-General, or is the bill something that could probably have easily been dealt with in a much shorter period? We would not therefore be having speeches like this or, I am sure, like some that will follow, other than under urgency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EAs I have indicated, as far as this part of the bill is concerned Labour will be supporting it. Whether we will be supporting it to the closure is a discussion that we are currently having. It is good that we have a careful look at it. But is it necessary to waste Parliament\u2019s time by taking a bill of this type? I do not want to say that it is not important, and that there will not be some things later where there will be some more\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245d429441d07440a8011551fa5659d03\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221028bac455ce45899a84afb5b4df3dfe\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the bill is very important, but it is not urgent. It is also a bill that could have been dealt with on its merits, rather than by having a big debate about the process\u2014if the process had been organised properly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe essence of the point that I want to make to the Attorney-General is that he needs to take some responsibility. He was the one who was parading around town saying he wanted to be a QC, or thinking he would be a QC, before he became a member of Parliament. He was someone who was so upset, on procedural matters, that he might be turned down by a previous Attorney-General, for that sort of thing; \u201Cprissy\u201D I think was the word that was used around the place, as to his approach. So I ask what has happened to those principles. What has happened to the Christopher Finlayson who wanted to be a QC, and to the proper approach to lawmaking that he used to promote? He might have changed his mind on the substance of this bill, and I congratulate him on catching up with people who were well-briefed back in those times. I think it is good that he admits now that he was wrong then. But does he think that this is the sort of process that should happen? Is he associating himself with Gerry Brownlee\u2019s chaotic handling of this House over the last week? It has been absolutely chaotic; an opportunity was turned down to have things done in an organised and proper manner. He will get much, much less through Parliament than he would have, had he accepted that opportunity. Longer time was spent on one point of order than on an entire question time, and now we have the chief legal officer of Parliament ramming constitutional legislation through this House, under urgency, in a manner that is just inappropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002292557bd5-0e66-473c-a6df-7d108e7822e3\u0022 data-id=\u00221a17b0eb3b414b74bcb31580e98e406a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292557bd5-0e66-473c-a6df-7d108e7822e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221a17b0eb3b414b74bcb31580e98e406a\u0022\u003EDr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I have already expressed, in the second reading of the Judicial Matters Bill, the Green Party\u2019s support for this important but not urgent bill, especially in regard to Part 1. But in this intervention I will address just one matter. In a sense it is a procedural matter not unlike that which has just been articulated. It has to do with Supplementary Order Paper 108, submitted by the Attorney-General. That Supplementary Order Paper would, among other things, insert a new section 16A, as I understand it, in the Judicial Matters Bill, which in turn would amend section 9 of the District Courts Act 1947. That amendment would specify that higher duties allowances\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022303631f471ba47b49d744e1ad59319e5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is actually speaking on new Part 1A. We are on Part 1, so I ask the member to concentrate on Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292557bd5-0e66-473c-a6df-7d108e7822e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226020200e874c4230949801e0c234c565\u0022\u003EDr KENNEDY GRAHAM\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I will wait until the next part comes up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1fad1b241db4c7cb16d4e79a0e75678\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1fad1b241db4c7cb16d4e79a0e75678\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour\u2014Christchurch East):\u003C/span\u003E I will follow on from the comments that my colleague Trevor Mallard made, because we should not be debating this bill under urgency. I know that Hansard will record that this contribution was made on 23 February, but I think that in fact\u2014I do not have my diary with me\u2014we are up to 25 February. That means that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b26f10debf634bd59945e10df3616202\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Not in here, we\u2019re not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022748f9abc07944f74964f40e1bd744652\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: Well, for Parliament, time stands still. Most people do not know about the effect of the urgency motion: the day stops on the day that the urgency motion is adopted by the House, and then we are essentially extending the sitting hours of the House so that even though we get to go home to bed at midnight and come back at 9 o\u2019clock in the morning, in actual fact Parliament shows itself as sitting on the same day\u2014in this case, 23 February. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003ENormally at this time I would be chairing the Commerce Committee\u2014a very, very good committee. I think that other members of the House would agree\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219bcf2ff-a193-4361-9072-813a4e36683c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022182caafd3e214b848f3859dc74743d3e\u0022\u003EPeseta Sam Lotu-Iiga\u003C/span\u003E: Good chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228dcdcf030c6c4a76bcecd00e234e08ef\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: Good deputy chair over there, as well. We are very effective. And Charles Chauvel would be chairing the Regulations Review Committee. He is a very good chair of that committee; it is a very good committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf0bafc5c07844c2945a67be204a8136\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. It sat this morning. We dealt with the business.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7c7df6c955f49e5a726c2f29d9753bd\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh! Well, the point I am making is that other business of the House would be being conducted in other forums if this bill were not going through under urgency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI think Mr Mallard missed one essential point about the nature of this legislation. Even though we agree with Part 1\u2014we were the Government that introduced Part 1\u2014we will have a further debate about moving amendments, under urgency, to what is a constitutional bill. That is the point Mr Mallard did not pick up on\u2014this is a constitutional bill. Judicial matters bills always are constitutional bills; that is why the Attorney-General is the Minister in the chair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThis bill is not a matter for the Minister of Justice; it is a matter for the Attorney-General. I am very pleased we are debating Part 1. I also congratulate the Attorney-General on having the integrity\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228accc69257cb47c7833f693dafed837f\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: The grace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1cbaacec23c4703ba8739fa80407af9\u0022\u003EHon LIANNE DALZIEL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014the grace, to say that after reflection on practice, the situation is different from how he expected it to be. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EBut there is a little bit that kind of sticks in my throat\u2014just a little\u2014and I thought I would cover some of the things the Attorney-General said when he was of a different mindset. First of all, he talked about the ridiculous nature of the regime. He said that in 2004 National had opposed the substantive legislation. He said: \u201CWe said that it was an unwarranted attack on judicial independence and that it would encourage ineffective and stupid complaints\u2014in fact, that it would encourage a culture of complaints.\u201D Later on in that same commentary, he said: \u201COf course, judges can be rude, grumpy, or discourteous. In many cases one can hardly blame them, given the quality of submissions they have to hear from lawyers. But are we such a weak-kneed, sissy society that if a judge barks at us we have to run off to some judicial complaints body?\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI think that that was spoken by a true list MP. If that member had ever had a constituent in his office talking about how he or she felt about judges\u2014not just the decisions but the way in which the constituent was treated and spoken to by the judge; sarcasm, no eye contact\u2014the member would know that those are all things that lead to a grievous sense of grievance. It is much worse, often, than it is at the beginning of court proceedings. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EI had such a constituent in my office last week, and I can understand how he felt. I also understand the message the judge was trying to give, but there was a total disconnect. Therefore, there was a complaint. I see this judicial complaints process as a steam valve on what would otherwise be a pressure cooker environment. It is not for lawyers that the complaints provisions exist; it is for the ordinary people who live along the street, who end up in a court environment, and who find themselves on the receiving end of something more than rudeness, grumpiness, discourtesy, or a lack of grace; it is a complete lack of a meeting of the minds. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EPeople often think they can effect change by court proceedings. I think that the Attorney-General and I would probably agree that that is not possible. So neighbourhood disputes end up in our courts when they should never end up there. People want to prove they are right, so others have to be proved wrong, but the court is not the place to prove those sorts of things. The Judicial Conduct Commissioner has really helped in that process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u00228c31404b6594473690cf926f2146de73\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c31404b6594473690cf926f2146de73\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to support the Judicial Matters Bill, and also to record my support for the submissions that have been made by earlier speakers as to process. I think it would have been desirable if this bill had not been considered under urgency, and I think it would have been desirable that the changes proposed by a Supplementary Order Paper were made in some other way. The points have been well made by earlier speakers, and I will not add to them. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022 data-id=\u00226b37dfe126424d5493f6dbaa1f5c09e4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226b37dfe126424d5493f6dbaa1f5c09e4\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour\u2014New Lynn):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to take a short call on the Judicial Matters Bill. I record Labour\u2019s support for the bill, and its opposition to the Supplementary Order Papers. As the previous two speakers have noted, this bill affects matters of a constitutional nature. It is largely above politics and is about the conduct of judicial behaviour. The important place of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner in our system is recorded, as is the need for judicial conduct panels. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThe main provisions of the bill include establishing the new office of the Deputy Judicial Conduct Commissioner, appointed by the Governor-General on the recommendation of the House of Representatives, after the House has been advised by the Attorney-General. The Attorney-General has to consult the Chief Justice on that recommendation. The function of the deputy commissioner is to carry out the duties of the commissioner in relation to complaints during his or her absence from office or incapacity. Of course, on occasion the commissioner can face potential conflicts of interest, and if those arise the deputy commissioner will be able to step in. That is all in the name of ensuring that the conduct review process is quite clearly beyond reproach, as is appropriate, and I am sure that the Attorney-General, who is sitting in the chair, would agree. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThe bill gives to the commissioner a power to take no further action in respect of a complaint if he or she is satisfied that further consideration of that complaint would, in all the circumstances, be unjustified. That is a magnificent legal truism; none the less it speaks to a point, which is that there needs to be discretion on the part of the commissioner to decline to deal further with complaints that might be, for example, of a vexatious or frivolous nature, or complaints that in the commissioner\u2019s view are outside the powers or role of the office of the commissioner. That power is in addition to the three current powers to dismiss the complaint if it is vexatious, to pass the complaint on to a judge who is a superior to the one subject to complaint, or to set up a special judicial conduct panel. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EI guess it goes to the point that my colleague the Hon Lianne Dalziel made, which is that we should not ignore the possibility that judges themselves can come under pressure. It is a difficult job. They receive variable submissions, and they have to deal with a large number of clients who find themselves in all sorts of different circumstances. Judges come under some enormous time pressures, and from time to time they can show that pressure. I think it is also important for us to note that judges are human. Judges themselves bring to the courtroom their own perspectives and they reflect their own backgrounds, and from time to time, unusual as it is, those factors may cause a judge to demonstrate behaviours that might not, in other circumstances, be appropriate. It is also fair to say that a large number of our judges are male, a large number of them are relatively senior in years, and most of them are Caucasian. Those factors all bring a certain inherent perspective, and it is important that we have processes that provide assurance to the public that no matter what the background or constitution of the judge, they will be entitled to a fair legal hearing before the courts. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EI think members across this Chamber would be of the view that one of the great treasures of living in New Zealand is that we have a legal system that, by and large, functions pretty well and accords to New Zealanders the opportunity to have their business heard, should they need to, in a fair and just manner. That is why, of course, we have things like legal aid. It is important that justice is available for all; that cases are decided primarily on the merit of the case, not on the size of the wallet; and that access to justice reflects the constitutional rights of every citizen. This bill is one small way of enhancing the process of further buttressing the review mechanisms within the process, to ensure that unfortunate biases or errors of behaviour can be dealt with. As such, in general, the Labour Party supports it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003ELabour will be voting against Supplementary Order Papers 108 and 109, and I will take just a moment to explain why. According to the explanatory note, Supplementary Order Paper 108 will give the commissioner an added option, after the preliminary examination, to refer the complaint, if substantiated, to the head of bench, under section 17 of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act. Of course, a number of consequential amendments flow from that amendment. It will increase from 140 to 156 the maximum number of District Court judges. It will authorise the payment of higher duties allowances to High Court judges serving in the Court of Appeal so that they rest on a more secure constitutional foundation\u2014what a lovely turn of phrase.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c78f806a17743f5ab4b405a152098cd\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The substance of the member\u2019s speech is now relating to new Part 1A. We are on Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022506865d6a3844086860e7583bae79eee\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairman, for that clarification. I thought it appropriate to mention the overall position that the Labour Party is taking, but I take the guidance of the Chair that it is not appropriate in this part of the debate to go into the detail of those Supplementary Order Papers. I merely record the fact that the Labour Party will be opposing both Supplementary Order Paper 108 and Supplementary Order Paper 109. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EIn continuing, I note that the current Attorney-General raised a number of objections when in Opposition during the first reading. He said: \u201CThat is the National Party approach\u2014do it subtly, but do it effectively.\u201D I think that comment bears remarking upon, perhaps more in its general context. A very active debate is going on in this country about whether the hallmark of the current Government is subtlety or effectiveness, in the words of the Attorney-General. Those of the \u201Csubtlety\u201D view, including many in the business community, are of the view that the Government is so subtle that it is almost impossible to discern its direction of travel. That has been one of the main responses of the commentariat to the Prime Minister\u2019s opening speech to the House. Certainly in the economic policy area, which is for a debate different from today\u2019s, there is a great deal of concern in the business community about whether the Government\u2019s intentions are clear enough and whether there is a coherent strategy that would allow the economy to expand and create jobs. Labour members would welcome further elucidation of the Government\u2019s intentions in that sphere, because try as we might, we are not quite sure how the so-called pillars of change add up to a substantial positive impact on the economy. That is the \u201Csubtlety\u201D school of thought. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThe \u201Ceffectiveness\u201D school of thought, which gives some members of the business community comfort, is that the Government really does have a significant plan for change up its sleeve, but it does not yet wish to tell New Zealanders what it is, because they might not like it. The \u201Ceffectiveness\u201D school tends to the view that many of these things will be revealed in the Government\u2019s second term, if it is fortunate enough to have one, and that in the second term we might see the Government showing a more\u2014what would be a good, judicial phrase? It could be \u201Ca more flagrant\u201D\u2014perhaps not. It could be \u201Ca more unmasked determination to deliver to core stakeholders\u201D, as they might put it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EI am admittedly drawing a bit of a tangential bow from the, as always, perspicacious semantic approach of the Attorney-General. He has nailed National\u2019s approach: \u201Cdo it subtlety, but do it effectively.\u201D In so doing, I think the Committee would congratulate this one office holder on unifying these two strands of thought about the nature of this Government. He has unified them in one sentence, and he has said they are both right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c20c5105a10d48ecacb4ee2e9b69f635\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s their philosophical oracle.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c2fc8df8b5c4d3caa1aa2b57942d8c7\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: As my colleague has pointed out, he is their philosophical icon\u2014was that the word?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4093c25232548fcbe74178d5b73e607\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: Their oracle.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289d60f530ce146a5aa557c180ef2a2c6\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: He is their oracle. He has gone beyond icon to oracle. No doubt we will be addressing him as Sir Christopher Finlayson before long.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229fd029ba3b8044b29e860017ee246195\u0022\u003EHon Christopher Finlayson\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9ca1ef068d040f8aeb2f109cc3298de\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: The Attorney-General, I am told, is a republican and for that reason would not accept the title of Sir, were it proffered. I see he is not rising to his feet. I wonder whether he wishes to clarify, for the record, whether he is a republican\u2014my understanding is that he is\u2014and whether he would turn down the title of Sir if offered, but presumably not during the first term of office. Automatic knighthoods for all members of Cabinet are one of those second-term things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EWe look forward to the day when the true nature of this Government comes to full blossom.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u00224d8089085a454454b25f26a1a135f0a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d8089085a454454b25f26a1a135f0a6\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I should clarify just one matter. After having consulted colleagues and having heard the Attorney-General\u2019s explanation of the new changes proposed in Part 1, the Labour Party finds itself in the position of being compelled to vote against Supplementary Order Paper 108 in its entirety. This is a procedural point; it is about the undesirability of bringing this matter before the Committee, both under urgency and by way of Supplementary Order Paper rather than through the select committee process. Obviously Supplementary Order Paper 109, the measure simply to divide the bill, will not be opposed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 108 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to Part 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022062d1d46e5394198b6add05cbbd9e877\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b94f27eccd7b47d3bb8e6376457d0278\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u002256247f6382c84687bcb8945c92d94799\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002256247f6382c84687bcb8945c92d94799\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General):\u003C/span\u003E We now come to what is to be Part 1A. I will go through the motions, notwithstanding the information of Mr Chauvel, and then we will have to take further steps. As required by Standing Order 299, I seek the leave of the Committee to move the amendment to the District Courts Act set out in Supplementary Order Paper 108, which is the new Part 1A amendment to the Judicial Matters Bill. Leave is required because the amendment is a substantive one to an Act not amended by the bill as introduced. All parties represented in the Committee were actually consulted on the amendment, and until this morning my understanding was that all parties had indicated they would support this course of action. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af4500bf71e647c7a2e6041d56fb0461\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that course of action.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u0022db718338f9ac4bddbb7b1c0252c12ff5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022db718338f9ac4bddbb7b1c0252c12ff5\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I just seek clarification in terms of that consultation, because there may be some misunderstanding here. If we gave an undertaking that we would support that legislation, I would like that to be clarified before we take the vote, if that is possible. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292231704de994c7da46e2e466596c7da\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: My understanding is that the undertaking was for the support of the consideration\u2014not necessarily for support of the amendment\u2014so that the amendment can come back to be debated now. That is my understanding. Is that acceptable? Do you understand the position?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7c480b9106f431b9f82a4c8df21d7b0\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I think I understand the position. I was confused.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b647bfcdfe364c2585f662378ef38b84\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022e16ddb4a242a403688424d866f869516\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e16ddb4a242a403688424d866f869516\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Committee report progress and ask to sit again presently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022418c1a37a1ea48a09db3a368982622c9\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000102\u0022\u003EProgress reported.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000103\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225574779ff6be48528b586ca57486471a\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I call Government order of the day No. 5. Is some member seeking the call?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223be2ffdeabb4497c9a4533e88acb436a\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker! Mr Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022543b02f442d94f47af5e37484d790bed\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute, while I get some advice. It has to be a Minister, I think. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ed9d95d3e4b249c1a77ab109fb2220ef\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Stand up, Paula. You\u2019re the only one who can do it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224db2da00a4924a76ac24fe2d690f0fa4\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a652d125a3164f4e9ada70d06ec53a6f\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, come on! What chaos! What\u2019s going on here? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228adac8944b3f4c49abea4d63746f726e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Please sit down\u2014does some Minister wish to move the second reading?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022814d5631e1bc492db100366ff926e5be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022814d5631e1bc492db100366ff926e5be\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The issue that has arisen is in relation to a Supplementary Order Paper on the Judicial Matters Bill. What was proposed was that leave be sought\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022240bb1dce1dd42f4a5839e621ecdb452\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, he is talking to a bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1ac53b43d1840ff92842971653521c7\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d74189c0f9e4869b858eb1fbd603fdf\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: You have called a bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0e58650a6a144d9b493c5c229b60e23\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I have a point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ea3454398e645ad803341fc74748bae\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, you have called a bill, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f6c633c603848a9b9a074850161ca8b\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Please sit down. The member has raised a point of order. He said it was a point of order, and I am hearing it. I have not yet determined whether it is a point of order, but the member has raised a point of order and I need to hear it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299f716b476834ae8a7dae168d4ac1160\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: He cannot raise it on a bill that is not before the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022281adf95098a4d848f616b0192f31091\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I will determine that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aca4bcd041ee4c45ab1f0cd4b7ec1405\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: I am dealing with a procedural matter, if the member would listen carefully. Because leave was denied in relation to part of Supplementary Order Paper 108, the House reported progress. Because of the numbers of people standing, around here, I was not in a position to stand up and move a motion in relation to seeking leave that the Committee deal with that particular part of the Supplementary Order Paper, which is the motion that I was seeking to deal with. But you, Mr Assistant Speaker, then moved on to item No. 5 on the Order Paper. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00222509077c74624333aab5057c0f9b770c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222509077c74624333aab5057c0f9b770c\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E The first point I make is that that is not a point of order because it is not relevant to the bill that is currently before the House, which is the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. There was an opportunity for, and we were expecting, Mr Finlayson to move a motion. We were waiting for him to move a motion; he did not. He missed it. What happened then was that the Clerk called the next bill and you offered the call repeatedly. I tried to get the call; my colleague Maryan Street tried to get the call. I tried to get a Minister to speak on the bill that is currently before the House. Neither of the two Ministers who were in the House, the Attorney-General or the Minister for Social Development and Employment, rose. You called repeatedly for a Minister; a Minister did not rise. I am not quite sure what happens now. I think possibly we might even move on to the next business. I think it is a matter of getting advice. But it is very, very clear that the Minister now\u2014and there has been one call on that bill\u2014has an ability to adjourn the House, if he wants to. He can take a call on that bill and adjourn the House, or he can wait for another couple of calls and at that point move a motion to get the House back into Committee. But for at least two calls now, a Government call and an Opposition call, we are on the student loan legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00221e27eea9bfcf4b81be79f4f5c995866f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221e27eea9bfcf4b81be79f4f5c995866f\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I was watching events on television\u2014this is a high-rating programme\u2014and saw what happened. I clearly heard you call Government order of the day No. 5. I saw the Clerk stand and read out the name of that bill. I then heard, although the microphone was not live, the unmistakable sound of the call of Mr Mallard saying: \u201CMr Speaker! Mr Speaker\u2014\u201D, and I heard you say that you were seeking advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EClearly, Mr Mallard cannot be the first speaker on a Government bill, because a Minister is required to move a motion with regard to the second reading. Mr Mallard points out that neither Minister present in the Chamber did move so, so we are in a quandary. There is no question that we have moved on from the Judicial Matters Bill; I think that is clear. We have called Government order of the day No. 5 and we are on to that. However, I see that the Minister of Revenue, Mr Dunne, has arrived. The bill is in his name. I think that for the best sense of order, the most appropriate thing would be for Mr Dunne now to move the second reading of this bill so that we can proceed. Otherwise, I think we are at an impasse that cannot otherwise be resolved. I cannot seek leave on behalf of another member, but we would have no objection if Mr Dunne sought leave to take a call at this time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3e52fc367e246d481b51c54252cffcc\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca716e0b96d148498d42985e548f7ef1\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I do not need any further assistance. I think the only thing we are very clear of is that the House is in a somewhat confused state. Even in the report of the proceedings in the Committee there was some question about how that was summed up and presented. I can understand there being some element of confusion about that. Consequently, the Hon Christopher Finlayson may not have had quite the opportunity to make the point he was going to make. In any case, I have called Government order of the day No. 5. Only a Minister can respond to that, and that is why I could not give the call to the members who were both seeking it. I think they understand that. I am prepared to take a call from a Minister on Government order of the day No. 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222f5385e910ed44fda02da21aefaa6024\u0022\u003EStudent Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b74d21fac6a94a188b7a32beafd3bd08\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022 data-id=\u002244a2dab9dea64b8da4b1259d0c96eeb1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002244a2dab9dea64b8da4b1259d0c96eeb1\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. The measures in this bill are part of continuing efforts to ensure that the student loan scheme is managed in an efficient and consistent way. They include a suite of mainly technical changes to the repayment rules to ensure that the law is clear and consistent, and that it operates as intended. The bill also extends interest-free loans to borrowers from Niue, the Cook Islands, and Tokelau, which share a special relationship with New Zealand that is sometimes referred to as their being part of the Realm of New Zealand. I note that when I used that term in an earlier debate Mr Hayes, I think, took some exception to it, but I quickly reminded him that it is the phrase that the Governor-General often uses in such situations, and without bringing him into the debate, I think it is appropriate to follow his guidance. Because the Ross Dependency is also part of the Realm of New Zealand, borrowers who go there may also qualify for an interest-free loan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe 183-day requirement for borrowers to be present in their country is the same criterion that must be met by New Zealand - based borrowers to qualify for interest-free loan status. That requirement is in place to encourage borrowers to remain in New Zealand or to return home from overseas to make their contribution to our economy and growth. The bill applies the same 183-day requirement to borrowers from what we now describe as realm countries so that they have an incentive to return home after their study and make a positive contribution towards the economic and social future of their particular country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThis bill also acknowledges the value that students who pursue further study overseas bring to New Zealand, and extends interest-free loans to include students furthering their education overseas through full-time study under formal exchange programmes or formal agreements between New Zealand and overseas tertiary education providers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EI acknowledge the work of the Education and Science Committee on this bill; it made several worthwhile refinements to it. The first of these extends the overseas exemption to include those engaged in full-time study overseas if their New Zealand tertiary provider has confirmed that their studies cannot be completed in New Zealand, but would count towards a New Zealand qualification at level 8 or above. The other small but important change provides greater clarity by defining the term \u201Coverseas tertiary provider\u201D so it is clear what type of organisation borrowers must be engaged in full-time study with overseas in order to qualify for interest-free loan status. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe remaining changes in the bill are largely of a technical or remedial nature to ensure that the law works as intended. Briefly, they include an amendment to correct an unintended change to the hardship relief provisions made by the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Act 2007, a change that allows the Inland Revenue Department to raise the compulsory deduction rate from 10 percent to 15 percent to help ensure that borrowers pay their correct loan repayment amounts, and the removal of a technicality so that borrowers returning to New Zealand who wish to fully repay their loans before they have met the 183-day requirement to qualify for an interest-free loan can do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThey are the main features of the bill. I record my thanks to the select committee for its detailed consideration of this matter, and for its thoughtful recommendations, which have made for further improvement and clarity in this bill. I think that, overall, these changes will help ensure that the student loan scheme works in the way that it was intended for both borrowers and the Crown, and consequently with great pleasure I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u0022b392e33b72fa436cabae1a6f88dfafd1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b392e33b72fa436cabae1a6f88dfafd1\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I rise basically in support of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, but to begin with I need to draw attention to the complete shambles that has developed in this House because of the taking of urgency. This may be the one bill in the whole panoply of bills that the Government has put up under urgency that actually warrants urgency, because some action is required to be taken by 1 April. But this bill is about the only one that does. Even this bill was teetering on the brink of not being able to be introduced into the House for its second reading, because there was not a competent Minister in the Chamber to move the motion. The Government whips had no sense of anticipation that because of the shambles that was developing over the previous bill under consideration, they needed to alert the Minister in charge of this bill, the Hon Peter Dunne, to get to the House promptly so that he could take it up. In the event, two Ministers, the Hon Chris Finlayson and the Hon Paula Bennett, were sitting in the House, but neither of them had the wit to get up and even move procedurally or do some kind of form speech while waiting, presumably, for the whips to ring the relevant Minister\u2019s office to get the relevant Minister to the Chamber pronto. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis is a complete shambles. This is what happens when a Government tries to avoid question time, when it has been trying to use the procedures of this House in order to defend indefensible Ministers. This particular bill warrants urgency. I am\u2014and we in the Labour Party are\u2014perfectly happy to acknowledge that it warrants urgency. We support this bill. But this cannot go past without some trenchant criticism of the process by which we have got to this moment. In the urgency motion there was a raft of legislation that did not need to be taken under urgency. It was clearly a ruse and a device that allowed the Government to let its panicked, panicky Ministers\u2014such as the Minister of Education, Anne Tolley, or the Minister of Housing, Phil Heatley\u2014to get off the hook and not be subjected to the kind of grilling their performance in the task of being a Minister of the Crown absolutely demands that they be subjected to in the process of question time. This cannot go past without comment. Although we are now at the second reading of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, I have to say that it is only by the skin of its teeth and by some cooperation on our part that this bill is reaching this stage in any kind of order. That fact goes to the competence of the Leader of the House, Gerry Brownlee, and to the attention paid by the Government whips to what is actually transpiring in the House as we proceed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EHowever, there is one other thing I wish to raise in relation to the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. Between the time this legislation was first introduced into the House, was referred to the Education and Science Committee, and appeared for its second reading, we have had a change of Minister for Tertiary Education. Although this is a bill that rightly comes under the purview of the Minister of Revenue, it will be interesting in the Committee stage if the new Minister for Tertiary Education responds to some of this debate, so that we can discover whether the Minister of Revenue has briefed him about this bill. This is about the student loan scheme, it is about miscellaneous provisions, and it refers to exemptions. It will be interesting to see whether the fact that the new Minister, Steven Joyce\u2014who was brought in to repair the damaged and broken relationships between this Government and the tertiary education sector, which resulted from the stewardship of the previous Minister for Tertiary Education\u2014has student loans in his sights has any bearing upon this current legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis legislation extends the student loan scheme to all those within the Realm of New Zealand, and that is a good thing. We support that, despite the fact that there are not many in the Ross Dependency who are likely to take this up\u2014we may have the best educated penguins in the world. We are supportive of the extension of the scheme to people in Niue, Tokelau, and the Cook Islands. However, I am somewhat at a loss to know quite what the direction of the student loan scheme will be under the new Minister for Tertiary Education. He has made it explicit that although he acknowledges it was a political call to maintain interest-free student loans\u2014in other words, the Government would have taken a real drubbing on this issue at the general election had it not decided to continue to support it\u2014he has decided that he will make it harder for students to access student loans. This is clearly on the agenda of this Government under the new Minister. The previous Minister\u2019s relationships with the tertiary sector were in such a parlous state that she was beginning to not even meet with them any longer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2e1d0c57f374c0c89820f324a75ae17\u0022\u003ECarmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: She was in a helicopter flying over them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4e903a1942f430d92d7c0318fb703d7\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: She was busy in helicopters. However, the point is that we have had a change in direction around student loans from the new Minister. If he makes it harder for people to access student loans, how does this legislation, which extends student loans to people throughout the Realm of New Zealand, in that old terminology, square with the new Minister\u2019s intentions? Will the loans be harder to access?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EOne of the provisions in this legislation will permit the Commissioner of Inland Revenue to increase the standard rate of repayment deductions from 10c to 15c in the dollar where borrowers have failed to have correct deductions made or failed to pay any other due amount. I understand the Green Party\u2019s objection to making that burden harder, but I think it is also incumbent upon the Government to ensure that people are not abusing and misusing the scheme. The vast majority of students whom I know and to whom I talk have been deeply grateful for an interest-free student loan policy because they absolutely need this money to get through their studies. The amount of abuse is infinitesimal compared with the number of those who use the scheme for its correct purpose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EWe support the bill, albeit recognising the Green Party\u2019s objection in its minority report from the select committee. We are not objecting to incentivising people to pay back their loan. However, I do not see how this legislation, as it stands now, will fit in with the Minister\u2019s express desire to make it harder for students to access loans, therefore making it harder for people to access tertiary education, and, therefore, reducing the number of students in our tertiary institutions, which will reduce the expense to the Government. I hope that the Minister of Revenue has already taken this up with the new Minister for Tertiary Education. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022 data-id=\u0022abf6925dae8144ad838a9a0cbbbe04e8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022abf6925dae8144ad838a9a0cbbbe04e8\u0022\u003ECOLIN KING (National\u2014Kaik\u014Dura):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to take part in the second reading of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I start off by pointing out that National did commit to keeping interest-free student loans in place. We recognise that the scheme is a very generous contribution by taxpayers to tertiary education students, so we want to see that the whole process around the student loan scheme is tidy, appropriate, and fair. That is the very essence of this bill. It tidies up a number of areas, enhancing the student loan scheme and giving people certainty and clarity. We need to do that because 500,000 New Zealanders have student loans. Therefore, the scheme has a significant impact on the Crown accounts as a debt to be managed. It is in the region of $10 billion. We want to ensure that those people who enter into a student loan get quality education and that the country in return receives the most benefit from those people\u2019s higher education by way of completions, success, and the students realising their potential. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EOne concern we have in Government on this side of the House is that under the previous administration there was a total lack of incentive to repay one\u2019s student loan. In fact, there was a general sloppiness in the behaviour of the tertiary education sector,. That is why the Government in September introduced the 10 percent bonus repayment, which means that if people pay over $500 of their loan above their minimum requirement, we give them a benefit or a bonus on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThis bill has come through the House courtesy of the Minister of Revenue, who has oversight of it. I encourage everyone in the House to go on to the website and download the annual report relating to the student loan scheme. It is quite staggering to read. The principle itself is a good balance. In the context of this bill and the student loan scheme, there is an enormous amount of public good, but done properly there is an even greater amount of individual good. That is what we want to see. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EI will get on to the bill and interest-free loans for residents of the realm countries. We do a lot to aid those countries within our region\u2014and when talking about our region, I am referring to the South Pacific, effectively\u2014be it Niue, Tokelau, or the Cook Islands. Those countries have rights under our laws, and one of those rights is access to interest-free student loans. Up to this date, when those students came to New Zealand that was the case, but when they returned home it was not the case. This bill appropriately extends the provision so that students can continue to have interest-free loans when they return to their home Islands. That change is very good, because it benefits not only the Islands but it also balances out students\u2019 rights to the student loan scheme. Otherwise, invariably those students would stay in New Zealand in order to keep that right. Those Islands have an enormous need to be supported and to grow economically, and one hopes that those things are gained from the student loan scheme. The change will apply when the bill is brought into law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThis bill deals with a very interesting aspect of overseas study. At present there is a gap in our education system. At times there is no ability for students to continue their studies overseas on an interest-free loans basis, even though there may be a formal relationship between an institution in New Zealand and an overseas institution. This bill addresses that matter. Where there is a formal agreement between the New Zealand tertiary education provider and an overseas tertiary provider, there will now be the opportunity to retain the status of an interest-free student loan. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EUp to this date, as soon as a student left the country to study or work, the calculator would start ticking away. I trust that we can manage this change. We will need to register what those institutions are and what courses are being taken. The education needs to be at that higher level and one that is not provided in New Zealand. That, in itself, is fair but we must remember that when the interest-free student loan scheme was implemented it came to the attention of the Minister of Revenue that some 40,000 students overseas were claiming interest-free student loans but were not really deserving of them, so that had to be tidied up. Exemptions are an important aspect of bill, and we look to this amendment to tidy up matters respectfully around that issue, because we want the full ambit of opportunities to be opened up to students, whether they are doing a master\u2019s degree, PhD, or whatever. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThe other aspect that I thought would be controversial, with regard to the Green Party minority view, is that the Inland Revenue Department will have the ability to increase the rate of repayment deduction from 10c to 15c in the dollar for borrowers who have failed to have the correct deductions made or to pay any other amount when it is overdue. It became clear under examination by the Education and Science Committee that that provision does not include the occasion when there is failure by the Inland Revenue Department to send out the appropriate notification of payments. It would be unfair to be ruthless and try to claw that money back in an insensitive way. However, in many situations the department needs that flexibility. When we are talking about 10c to 15c in the dollar, it is not just one or the other; it is a sliding scale. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThis is a small bill, and although some speakers in the first reading debate said there was not a lot of substance to it, it is an important aspect of the legislation going forward. The bill adds to, critiques, and improves the Student Loan Scheme Act 1992. It is a balanced bill, and, generally speaking, on the select committee we worked collegially, and the advice we received from officials was very appropriate. The bill, in the form returned to the House, is still in much the same vein as it was at its first reading. The committee made a couple of recommendations and it was good to see that the Minister has picked up on those. On that basis, it is a pleasure to commend this bill to the House in the second reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022 data-id=\u002243d8cb0e2f374b769206d1ffdcdd15b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002243d8cb0e2f374b769206d1ffdcdd15b6\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E My colleague Grant Robertson said to me a moment ago: \u201CGet ready to jump up; it sounds like Colin\u2019s winding down.\u201D, but he said that from about the first minute of Colin King\u2019s speech. I wonder whether Colin King has any interest in education or whether he was given that speech and told to read it because we are 2 hours early, due to the earlier stuff-up in the House. He should show a bit of passion about education. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI think that education is the most important thing we can do for our children and our communities. That is why I stand now to speak in support of the second reading of the bill. It is hard to believe that the first reading was in August last year. Too many important bills affecting the people of New Zealand have been rushed through the House under urgency since then. Goodness me! We are only into the third week back this year and already we are rushing legislation through the House in what appears to be a slap-hazard way. I assume there must be some sort of plan or logic to the process\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f914b2f91fd4111b7d4d7cbe2bf9d3a\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s a bold assumption.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2491190d05f40eeae613a8b62c5b960\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I know. I certainly cannot follow it. I do not know whether Mr Hipkins can. Can anyone follow this? I do not think so. I do not think that the lack of process or progress is what the people of New Zealand voted for. There is a lot of stuff going on at the moment that I do not think the people of New Zealand voted for. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis bill, by and large, is a technical bill. The previous speaker said it did not have much substance. Well, it does have quite a bit of substance, but it is a technical bill. It enshrines a couple of important philosophies that we, as the Labour Party, strongly value. That is one of the main reasons why I support this bill. The Labour Party has always seen the fostering of the economic development of our Pasifika brothers and sisters as one of its major responsibilities and goals. This bill also builds on Labour\u2019s fantastic law of giving interest-free student loans to all students, and what wonderful legislation that was. It was, of course, as we all know, Labour legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EEducation has to be the cornerstone of economic development, and in my humble opinion the interest-free student loans legislation was one of the greatest pieces of economic development legislation passed in a generation. It certainly passes the Nash test of: \u201CIs it right for the people of New Zealand?\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022512d71fc0abf4a5f85a35ad45e2ca659\u0022\u003EGrant Robertson\u003C/span\u003E: I thought that was Harry Holland\u2019s.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022526418aeadf442bcbdbc7cd12c45399c\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: In talking of Harry Holland, I had to smile last night in this Chamber when Mr Macindoe was putting words into the mouth of the great Harry Holland, one of the Labour Party\u2019s great early leaders. I mean no disrespect to the member from somewhere in Hamilton, but those who know their political history will know that Mr Macindoe has a few more years of sweating blood for the people of New Zealand before he can even start to speak on behalf of the great Harry Holland. Sir Roger Douglas will know that, will he not? Harry Holland was a great man, but I digress. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis bill makes some technical amendments, but, by and large, it does three things. Firstly, it allows those from the nations of Niue, the Cook Islands, and Tokelau, and the Ross Dependency who have come to New Zealand to seek educational opportunities to return home in order to put their education and learning into practice. Secondly, it provides an incentive to those currently resident in the aforementioned countries to come to New Zealand to be educated, and then return home to families, friends, and jobs while achieving the same advantages as citizens domiciled already in New Zealand. Thirdly, it provide opportunities to New Zealand citizens who may wish to travel to Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, or the Ross Dependency in order to pursue professional opportunities for any number of reasons. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis bill also allows interest-free loans for students engaged in full-time study overseas under a formal exchange programme approved by the New Zealand Government or a formal agreement between a New Zealand education provider and an overseas tertiary education provider. In this day and age of globalisation that is a wonderful thing, so I commend the Minister of Revenue for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EIn my speech in the first reading debate I said I had a grave concern that the National Government would look to repeal the interest-free student loan provisions, which would therefore necessitate my being back in this House within 2 years in order to repeal the amended legislation. Well, why do we have it? I suppose Mrs Tolley was never going to do it. She had enough problems as it was, and loading the repeal of the interest-free student loan scheme upon her already fragile shoulders would probably have just been too much. So Mr Joyce was given the task. Are we surprised? Absolutely not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI tell members that as soon as the Labour caucus heard that Mr Joyce was being appointed the Minister for Tertiary Education we knew that it spelt trouble for current and aspiring students. In fact, it probably spells trouble for every person who has a student loan and is not paying interest at the moment. But at least Mr Joyce is honest. Well, he is honest on this: he said that his supporting the student loan scheme when he was the campaign manager for the National Party was a political call. That is nice! There was no philosophy or idealism behind that; it was a political call. At least we know what he believes in\u2014nothing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThe irony about National\u2019s planned removal of the interest-free student loans scheme is that the vast majority of members on that side of the House who went through the tertiary education system did so when it was free, yet here they are taking away those opportunities for students who now want to study and better themselves. That is amazing, actually. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis bill, as it stands, is, apparently, aspirational. With regard to this bill, the Minister of Revenue, Mr Dunne, said: \u201CThis is another positive step that will allow people to further their studies overseas in a way that will benefit New Zealand in the longer term.\u201D, and I totally agree with the Minister. That is one of the reasons, as I said, why I am supporting this bill. But, with all due respect, I ask this question: what about those who live here and want to stay and study in New Zealand? The National Government is about to steal the educational opportunities of thousands of New Zealanders, and that is simply not fair. It represents incorrect priorities. Well, let us see where the money has been stolen from. We are talking about just money stolen from education here, not from elsewhere. There is the $11 million from the training incentive allowance that the Prime Minister, Minister English, and every other National MP, M\u0101ori Party MP, and ACT MP have stolen from those who can least afford to get into education. That is $11 million gone. I am talking about solo parents who make a proactive choice to engage in education whilst they are bringing up their children. They have suddenly had their opportunities taken away\u2014gone. The Government has cut them out; it is unbelievable. Where are the priorities? That is dreadful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EWhat else has been taken away? The guidelines for healthy food in schools have gone. The Government has slashed, burnt, cut, and got rid of that. It has taken that away. Those members have taken away the funding for those who require it most. Where else has the money been taken from? It has been taken from high school night classes. It is unbelievable. Money has been taken from adult and community education.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EWhere has the money gone? I can report that about $35 million has gone into private schools, and I wonder whether that is fair. Thirty-five million dollars was stolen from the poor and given to the rich.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c17fd23a20d3422b92cd448ceeb506df\u0022\u003EPaul Quinn\u003C/span\u003E: What private school did you go to?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c69176bcfc34df6a8002e29145c4145\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: I tell Mr Quinn that I did not go to a private school. I believe in the State sector. I went to an incredibly good State school. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis Government is Robin Hood in reverse. We have the modern-day Sheriff of Nottingham, or the \u201CSheriff of Nothing\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c9f481a403d462f9e1fd9ef22fa61bb\u0022\u003EPaul Quinn\u003C/span\u003E: Hey! I went to a private school and I\u2019m proud of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246c71134b44f4bc6a69d30cab54c19b5\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: And look what it did for that member. Goodness me! I would not mention the school\u2019s name if I were Mr Quinn, because it would be embarrassed to have him as an alumni; there is no doubt about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EWhat else is this Government doing? It is raising GST to 15 percent. That will help everyone, will it not? I just cannot understand the logic. So $11 million has been taken from the training incentive allowance and $13 million has been taken from adult and community education classes, yet $35 million has been given to private schools. Yeah, that is about equality, is it not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba1eb8e803d04b1487dd8c96107c92d7\u0022\u003EAmy Adams\u003C/span\u003E: At least they teach their kids to read.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022659494baf53b4b969b9b424791a63ed1\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: Wow! That is an interesting assertion, is it not? That member said that State schools do not teach their children to read but private schools do. That is a damning indictment on the teachers who teach in the State education sector. Imagine saying that; it is unbelievable. The reason that member would not send her children to a State school is that only the private sector teaches children to read\u2014the State sector does not. I can inform the member that that is not true, at all. The State sector has some of the best teachers in this country and it does an amazing job. I take that as a slight against every teacher who teaches in the State sector. It is unbelievable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003ENational has never had a mandate or a belief system, and that has just proven it. That is why those members can slash and burn and make those sorts of comments to such an extent without any conscience. I can tell this House that under the next Prime Minister, the Hon Phil Goff, Labour will bring principled spending back to education. We believe, as we have always believed\u2014it is what the Labour Party stands for\u2014that the people of New Zealand demand and require the sound education system they had under Labour. The Government side of the House is taking away opportunities. This bill, though, provides opportunities, and that is why I commend it to the House. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022 data-id=\u002234a2c2226e8a487e8fa7a43023f91508\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002234a2c2226e8a487e8fa7a43023f91508\u0022\u003ECATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Assistant Speaker Roy. The Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill has some merit, but the Green Party has looked at it closely and, in context and on balance, we remain opposed to some of its key provisions. We may be a lone voice in the House and easily dismissed as unreasonable, because some good ideas are cemented by this legislation, namely the extension of interest-free loans to borrowers from Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, and the Ross Dependency. The Green Party is delighted to see the principle of interest-free loans being expanded to these communities. We hope this indicates recognition by the Government that education can be made inaccessible by both geography and market principles, and that the State can positively assist access to tertiary study. But under the new Minister for Tertiary Education we are not holding our breath and under the previous Minister we were not, either. There may not be many students in the Ross Dependency at the moment, but who knows? If we stick to the current pathetic climate targets, the area may become warm enough in the lifetimes of our children for a whole university. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThe Green Party applauds also the modifications that have been made to the bill since the select committee process. They have resulted in the Inland Revenue Department accepting, after a little bit of pressure, that it made a mistake in not notifying some students about overdue loan repayments, and, therefore, could not penalise them. There was a proposal to enforce a 15 percent repayment penalty on those students, but fortunately\u2014after some discussion at the Education and Science Committee, which I was happy to persist with\u2014the department withdrew support for that idea. This is a good example of the value of select committees in highlighting anomalous provisions that would create unintended consequences and unfairness, and the change is well made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EWe remain concerned about this bill, mainly because of the late payment penalties. As the New Zealand Union of Students\u2019 Associations stated in its submission, the increases proposed to the compulsory repayment deduction would be unmanageable and unacceptable. Student loan repayments kick in at the very low threshold of $19,084, and now is one of the worst possible times to increase student repayment rates. Whatever the optimistic economists and politicians choose to say, we are in recession. Many students are part of the low paid and underpaid. They are struggling to meet rent, food, and clothing costs, let alone debt. This especially applies to women students and to former students who are yet to experience pay equity in many occupations, let alone in the public sector. It is all so easy for Campbell Live to focus on the minority of irresponsible young people who wasted their money on inappropriate goods and behaviours. However, they are not necessarily the people who will be hurt by the increase in late repayment fees. Even they are merely reflecting back to us the lessons we have taught them: that they can have it all, that they can borrow and spend, and that they can live with debt because they are worth no real investment, and they must bear the risks. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThe relationship with debt that the student loans scheme entrenches is one of the most insidious and destructive processes invented. In a world where shopping for the latest goods and experiences that global capitalism can provide is promoted to everyone on every screen, we cannot blame the young for wanting it. Then we lend them money for their education. First, there was the crippling interest on all those loans and all students and then there was interest on overseas students only. Now there are murmurings of more changes to the student loans scheme by the new Minister for Tertiary Education, Steven Joyce. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EIt is pretty clear that Mr Joyce was not given this portfolio just as something to do while eating his lunch in between building more unnecessary motorways, and that the student loans scheme could always be made worse for students. This was also signalled in the Prime Minister\u2019s statement to this House when he waxed lyrical and said he wanted \u201Ca careful look at \u2026 student support and allowances to ensure that taxpayers\u2019 generosity is not being exploited\u201D. What did he mean? He is really concerned about the public getting their money\u2019s worth, but students are also members of the public, and they are not getting their money\u2019s worth. Now Steven Joyce is rolling up his sleeves to see what can be done about it. The political risk of reintroducing interest on loans seems too high right now, but, as Steven Joyce said last weekend, \u201Cwe\u2019re going to look at other requirements around those student loans,\u201D. What does Mr Key mean by taxpayer generosity? Does he mean that all of us older politicians who had no student loans are being awfully kind by indebting the next generation, and that we will demand more blood? What does Mr Joyce mean? Could he be referring to eligibility to enter study or to remain there? Will that be tightened? None of this is good news for students. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EIn the meantime this bill causes concern for the Green Party, mainly because of new section 20A(2)(a), which allows for an increase in the standard deduction rate of 10c in the dollar to a maximum rate of 15c in each dollar. Clause 20, which relates to section 55, talks about hardship relief. Considering that many, many students are in hardship they might need to think about this provision, because it could apply to a lot of people the Government is about to impose extra penalties on. If the Commissioner of Inland Revenue considers that a repayment obligation would cause serious hardship, he or she can offer hardship relief. But as serious hardship is not defined and would have to be proven, very many people are unlikely to be able gain this form of protection from clause 20. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EWe are very concerned about adding debt to people who are already failing to repay. It does not incentivise; it punishes. This is a bit like environmental pollution, whereby the burden of proof is always on the citizen and not on the polluter. The burden is on students to prove they are in hardship. Students have no choice but to have a debt if they want to study, and if they are not wealthy they cannot always earn their way out of it. At the select committee there was much talk about how students could earn their way out of debt. So many people I know who have left university are not earning their way out of it, because they are barely managing to live, let alone get a mortgage, and their student loan is still a huge burden on them. They are not progressing financially in the way that my generation just took for granted. It is purely unfair. It is a real indication of the value we put on our student body and the value we put on our society as a whole. The poor cannot earn their way out of debt when they start off with debt as young people. That is something I did not experience. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EWe oppose the additional burden, and the burden of proof being on students to prove that they are in hardship. We are opposed to the provisions of the bill to such an extent that we have to vote against the bill. Although we thought there was good discussion at the select committee about all the different aspects of the extension of interest-free loans, and we support that extension, we are deeply in opposition to clause 20, which adds to the hardship. It is just not fair to use the student loan scheme as a way of keeping people in poverty. To say that it is a debt on the country is true, but we have to take responsibility for the debt that was created. We created that debt when we created the student loan scheme. Many people out there today know what I am talking about, because they have not earned enough. Women, migrants and refugees, tangata whenua, Pasifika, and people with disabilities have absolutely no chance of the high-wage economy that the student loan scheme assumes is behind people\u2019s ability to repay loans. So the Green Party will continue to be consistent and principled in our attitude towards the student loan scheme and towards added burdens on young people in their education and in future life, and we will not support this bill. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u00223298ad17c32c4427bf90a6fa7f7986c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223298ad17c32c4427bf90a6fa7f7986c6\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to stand and speak in support of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. That is the bill we are talking about. It is actually in the name of the Minister of Revenue, Peter Dunne, but, unfortunately, some of the Opposition members keep mentioning other Ministers in the House, so it would be very helpful if they could remember that. This bill is in the name of the Minister of Revenue, and it is a technical bill that makes some changes. I am very pleased that I am able to remind members on the opposite side of the House of that and to correct the error of their ways. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EI want to agree with other speakers today on one thing: I want to agree with an earlier speaker from the Labour benches, who said that education is the cornerstone of economic growth. Clearly, a National Government totally agrees with that: education is a massive platform for us in terms of growing our economy, and we are extremely committed to having in place a student loan scheme that is balanced. But the important thing is also to put the right incentives in place to support and enable people to pay off their student loans faster than at present. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EI just want to put a bit of context around this bill in this second reading. We have heard from the Minister of Revenue that more than half a million New Zealanders have a student loan. Half a million\u2014that is a huge number. On the one side it is fantastic that there has been that amount of uptake; obviously the number of people in tertiary education is high in this country, and we need it to be. But one of the difficulties when as many New Zealanders as that have a student loan is that the scheme has a significant impact on our economy. I remind members on the other side of the House that hard-working New Zealanders who pay tax fund the student loan scheme. There are not just poor students with student loans; poor, hard-working New Zealanders pay tax from their income to support the student loan scheme. That is another important context that I want to put across. For some people, the Government\u2019s money grows on trees and everyone gets to write fat cheques with it. No, it is hard-working New Zealanders who fund the student loan scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EWhen National came into Government, it was concerned that under Labour there had been no incentives whatsoever for people to repay their loans earlier than they had to. That meant that loan holders were likely to be in debt for longer than was necessary, which we know is not good for anyone. That has implications and flow-on effects for other areas of former students\u2019 lives: delaying choices about whether to have a family, when to have a family, and whether to buy a house. National has fulfilled its election commitment to keep interest-free student loans for tertiary students. Part of that was also a commitment to build in a strong incentive for students to pay off their debts faster. That is great behaviour for us to reward, because we believe that education is the cornerstone of economic growth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EIn effect, there are three areas in this bill that I want to touch on. The first area relates to interest-free loans for the realm countries. This is particularly important to me as there is a large Pacific Island population in the electorate of Taup\u014D, so I am very keen to support the development of education for those people, as well. The second area relates to the overseas study provisions, and I want to talk about a case that I have had in my Cambridge office of a constituent who wanted to study overseas. The third area is the minor and technical amendments, which, for some reason, members on the other side of the House seem to think are unimportant or boring, but there are very important technical changes included in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003ELet us look at the first area, the interest-free loans for residents of realm countries. Many of the speakers today have talked about the importance of our support for Pacific countries. This means that borrowers in realm countries will be exempt from the requirement to be present in New Zealand in order to qualify for an interest-free loan. That is fair; it makes a lot of sense. It recognises the special relationship that we have with the realm countries. If we go back a step and look at the situation when interest-free loans were introduced in 2006, we see the scheme encouraged borrowers to remain in, or come back to, New Zealand. That was part of its intention. Niue, the Cook Islands, and Tokelau have a special relationship with New Zealand that gives their citizens the automatic right to reside and work here. So we wanted to extend the interest-free loans to borrowers who reside in these countries in order to recognise that special relationship. That is the first area of the bill\u2014interest-free loans for residents in realm countries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThe second area relates to overseas study, and there was some very interesting discussion in the Education and Science Committee around this particular measure in the bill. One of the issues is that when people want to study overseas, the situation generally is not that they want to study overseas but that they want to extend their existing study, and sometimes the course that they are interested in is not available in New Zealand because of its speciality or because they want to pursue a very technical field. I have had a case of that very kind in my electorate. A constituent came to see me because her daughter wanted to study in a very specialised field, and the course was not available in New Zealand. We do not want to be in the position where we restrict students\u2019 choice by limiting their study options, so this bill introduces an extension of the interest-free loan entitlement to students who are studying overseas full-time where the New Zealand Government has a formal exchange programme in place with the education provider. It means that students who want to pursue further studies in very specialised fields have that option available to them. In a case in my electorate of Taup\u014D, that was a very relevant consideration, and this particular clause will be helpful for that student. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThe third aspect of the bill is the minor, technical amendments. Members on the other side of the House may say that this is the not very exciting bit. Well, I totally disagree with that. I think that the minor, technical amendments are a critical part of this bill. Several matters are dealt with in this area of the bill. The Green member Catherine Delahunty spoke about hardship, and it is fair to say that many New Zealanders are experiencing hardship at the moment. This particular measure looks at students who are repaying their loans and makes some minor changes. Currently, the availability of relief is limited to the year that immediately precedes the current tax year. We, as a Government, want to make sure that students know about their obligations in terms of their debt. We have provided incentives for them to repay debts earlier. With regard to these changes, there will be some students who, unfortunately, fail to have the correct deductions made or who need to pay amounts that are due, so a change has been made in the deduction rate. There are also changes in some other areas relating to the early repayment of a loan and the grace period. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThis is important legislation, and I am proud to support it in its second reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022 data-id=\u00226480a286f58c4c2a8119869553b2fecc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226480a286f58c4c2a8119869553b2fecc\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour\u2014Wellington Central):\u003C/span\u003E I thank Louise Upston, the previous speaker from National, for her reminders on various matters during her speech. Members on this side of the House, however, were a bit disappointed that Maurice Williamson did not take that call, because earlier in the debate we heard the great quote\u2014probably the quote of the year, actually\u2014from Mr Williamson: \u201CSlash and burn never hurt anyone.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022148baf79f8e246c1bd27ebdad8ca5c23\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: A bit of slash and burn.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5098f3ee8c04bdfb32d0d0f4009040c\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CA bit of slash and burn never hurt anyone.\u201D If only Mr Williamson had taken a call, then we could have heard a little bit more about what he meant when he said that a little bit of slash and burn never hurt anyone, because that is really National\u2019s agenda when it comes to tertiary education. I have respect for Mr Williamson; he says what he thinks. He says what the National Government really thinks\u2014that a little bit of slash and burn never hurt anyone. Well, we have certainly seen a little bit of slash and burn in the tertiary education sector, and I think we will see a little more to come. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party supports this Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, because it is largely a technical bill, although I admit, as the previous speaker said, that there are some important elements in the bill in terms of the exemptions, particularly relating to the idea of people who are studying overseas on exchanges or scholarships. I think this is a good thing. It will allow people to continue their education in a way that New Zealand will benefit from. We will come back in the Committee stage to some of the technical amendments, particularly the one relating to the changes to penalties. I understand the Green Party\u2019s position on it, and I would like to raise a few questions with the Minister of Revenue about how information will be communicated to borrowers so that they know about the increased penalty rates. That has been one of the major issues for people when they have been going overseas\u2014not always understanding what requirements they have as borrowers. I think it will be very important, if we are to take a more punitive stance, that our borrowers know what they will be doing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EAlso, with regard to the hardship grounds, I think that, potentially, quite a good thing is being done there, but we need to understand fully how that will work, as well. Another one of the technical amendments is very technical. It is shifting the setting of the interest rate from regulations to the Student Loan Scheme Act. This seems like a minor amendment, but there are some questions to be raised about that, particularly in light of what happened this year with the setting of the interest rate. We just want to make sure that we are clear on how that will work. These technical matters tidy up some elements of the Act and the working of the scheme, and we are pleased to support that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EBut it is difficult for us to stand here and be completely comfortable when it comes to talking about student loans and this Government, because what we have heard in recent weeks, with the appointment of Steven Joyce as the Minister for Tertiary Education, is an absolute acknowledgment that National has never had a commitment to the interest-free student loan scheme. Steven Joyce said in the Press last Saturday that it was a \u201Cpolitical call\u201D to take on the interest-free student loan scheme. Those of us who were around when Labour brought in the interest-free student loan scheme are not surprised to hear that, because at the time it was introduced, John Key, who was then, I think, the finance spokesperson for the National Party, said that he would oppose interest-free student loans with every bone in his body. He said that with every bone in his body he would oppose them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c08c17ef937e4350b6041670aee64175\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Can\u2019t have many.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002251d412ea1dd6444eb3ea213e0ee22b58\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, there cannot be many bones at all\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebc63a8462e54ab981f2ff5208558d8b\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Spineless!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022351322f7e948432bae5e0150bf46beaa\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014spineless some might say, but not many bones at all. He told this very House that he would oppose interest-free student loans with every bone in his body, but a political call came along, and National adopted it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EBut we know that there is no commitment to the scheme, because both Mr Key and Mr Joyce in recent weeks have said that things need to be looked at with regard to the student loan scheme and that there need to be changes. In the Prime Minister\u2019s statement to Parliament, Mr Key made it clear that he wanted to tighten up the rules for access to student loans. He talked in particular about people who may not be passing their courses, and there was another very worrying phrase about people who were not moving into work quickly enough. We on this side of the House want to know what that means, because it sounds like a huge restriction on the ability of people to undertake multiple courses or to perhaps change tack part-way through a course. Not everybody arrives at tertiary study instantly ready and knowing what they want to do for the rest of their lives. We need to invest in education and allow people to develop their skills, and any tightening of the student loan scheme, any limiting of people\u2019s access to students loans\u2014which is what the Prime Minister was talking about in his statement to Parliament\u2014will be detrimental to New Zealand\u2019s future. The Government really needs to explain where it is heading with student loans. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003ESteven Joyce is a man whom I respect. He clearly has a good and quick understanding of how politics works and he has come into Parliament as a senior Minister, but he has said some things that I think belie the fact that he understands the student loan scheme properly. He said in the Press last weekend: \u201CThe simple point is, if you don\u2019t pay interest on any loan\u2014forget student loans for a second\u2014then there is less incentive to pay it back than if you do pay interest.\u201D The thing that Mr Joyce leaves out is that student loans are automatically deducted from one\u2019s salary once one earns more than $19,000 a year, at 10 percent. That is the incentive. The law gives the incentive. What appears to be happening is that Steven Joyce, in taking on this role, is looking to wind back elements of the interest-free student loan scheme before, I predict, in the future National attempts to wind back the whole scheme. We have heard phrases coming out of the National Government about the generosity of taxpayers. That phrase was used by John Key in his speech to Parliament. Louise Upston used it before. This is the beginning of the Government trying to say that students do not deserve interest-free student loans. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EWe know, and it is actually implicit in this bill, that the purpose of interest-free student loans in large part is to encourage people to stay in New Zealand. That is completely understood by this bill, because we are extending the loans to people from other territories, from Niue, the Cook Islands, and Tokelau, and to anyone in the Ross Dependency, as well. We are acknowledging that interest-free student loans are good in terms of the policy objective of keeping people in New Zealand and encouraging them to stay and contribute to our economy. National rejected that as a reason for interest-free student loans when they were first brought in, but this bill recognises that that is an important part of developing our economy and making sure that people stay here and contribute to our economy. That will be undermined if the National Government goes ahead with starting to restrict access to student loans and winding back the interest-free policy, which those members have never been committed to. Supporting it was a political call. It was a policy they would oppose with every bone in their body, but they were forced into supporting it for electoral reasons. They look to slowly but surely undermine that policy, and we on this side of the House will not stand for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EWe have had some comments from members on the other side of the House about the importance of education and about National\u2019s understanding of the importance of investing in tertiary education. But if we look at National\u2019s record on tertiary education, we see that there is no sign of that. Mr Nash has already spoken about the removal of the training incentive allowance. The last Budget took $60 million out of our polytechs, at the very time that they were necessary and important in terms of giving people skills during the recession. If we look across the Tasman, something that I know that National is very fond of doing, we will see that Australia in response to the recession invested in skills and technology; it made sure that people had free access to the equivalent of polytechnics if they lost their jobs. That was a bold move to ensure that people kept up their skills in a recession, and were able to contribute to the economy when the recession lessened. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EWhat we have from National is no investment in the tertiary sector. Where is the plan to say that because tertiary institutions are bursting at the seams, which they are, we will lift the cap, because circumstances dictate that we want people to be training so that they can contribute to the economy? We have seen nothing of that; we have simply seen a consistent undermining of the tertiary sector, the taking away of community roles on polytechnic councils, and a lack of investment in the future of New Zealand. Although we support this bill, because it includes some important technical changes, we are very wary of the direction of the National Government on student loans and very wary that it will undermine interest-free student loans, a policy that is important to our economy and important to our future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u002226b6ba5612b34f09b85e317f498e48ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002226b6ba5612b34f09b85e317f498e48ad\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (National\u2014Rangitata):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak on the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, and I note that this opportunity has been used for political statements, so I intend to make a couple of my own. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EThe first thing I want to say, having been on the Education and Science Committee that examined this bill, is that I am left with no illusions: the student loan scheme is extremely important to New Zealand, and it is important that it is working appropriately and managed in an efficient and consistent manner. That is what this bill is all about. It is not about revisiting whether we should have student loans. It is not about trying to scare the horses, which we have been listening to members from Opposition benches doing. This bill is about making sure that the student loan scheme works in an efficient and consistent manner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EAt the same time, I take this opportunity to say that we need to send the right messages to our students. We need them to understand that the student loan scheme is important to them but also to New Zealand, and that its value of $10.3 billion represents a significant asset to the Crown. We need them to be under no illusion that we see them also\u2014the students of New Zealand\u2014as a very, very valuable asset, and that is why they have the opportunity to take student loans. I am right in the midst of this at the moment, with three daughters at university, the last of whom headed off to university just a couple of days ago. One delivers one\u2019s children to university and hopes like hang that they use that opportunity and understand the responsibility that they have to make wise decisions for their future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EOf course, the students who are going to university will be making decisions about whether they take out a student loan and whether they have a holiday job, and about their future and what courses they will take. Some of them will make the wrong decisions, and will revisit those decisions. But they will have in place a student loan scheme that National is committed to having in place, and a student loan scheme that is balanced but at the same time puts in place incentives for those young people to pay their loan more quickly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EOne in four New Zealand graduates heads off overseas, and that is really regrettable because we want those young people to stay here in this country. It is not just the correct settings on the student loan scheme that will enable that; we have to put a whole lot of settings in place. I note that yesterday there was an announcement by the Government to extend voluntary bonding to my own district health board of South Canterbury. I understand that that is yet another way that we can keep students and medical graduates in New Zealand by putting in place the right incentives. That is exactly what this National Government is doing\u2014looking at all incentives to keep those valuable young people here. Who wants to think of their children being in another country\u2014having a good job, perhaps\u2014and having to go and visit them and their grandchildren? This is something that is certainly coming home to roost to me. I really hope that our daughters will find good jobs in New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EMore than half a million New Zealanders have a student loan. Many have made long-term financial decisions on the basis of the current interest-free student loan policy, and we want to assure them that they can plan with certainty. National, however, was concerned that under Labour there was no incentive for students to repay their loans earlier. That seemed pretty crazy to us. That meant that loanholders were likely to have their debt for longer, of course, which has implications for other areas of their lives\u2014as well as implications for the Crown\u2014such as when they are buying a house or starting a family. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003ENational has fulfilled its commitment to keep interest-free student loans for tertiary students. Back in September 2009 we passed legislation that provided for a 10 percent bonus for both New Zealand borrowers and overseas-based borrowers who make voluntary repayments on their student loans of $500 or more in a tax year, which gives those students the opportunity to reap the rewards of saving and paying off their student loans earlier. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EThis bill introduces mainly technical changes\u2014and I will probably go into more detail about those changes in the Committee stage or third reading. It extends the grace period, removes the hardship criteria, and allows students who return to New Zealand 6 months of interest-free loan, to fulfil our commitment to a balanced scheme that takes into account these more difficult economic times. I make no apology for making my share of political statements in my speech this morning. However, we really need to get back to the reason for this bill. It is about managing the student loan Crown asset, which is what it is, in an efficient and consistent manner, and I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022 data-id=\u00228674d6a23b9744de97d230eee216c02c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228674d6a23b9744de97d230eee216c02c\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS (Labour\u2014Rimutaka):\u003C/span\u003E It is a slightly strange feeling for me to be standing to speak in favour of a Government bill; it is something we do not get to do very often on this side of the House. It is nice to be able to support one of the initiatives that the Government has in place. The interest-free student loan scheme is one that I am particularly proud of, and one that the previous Labour Government is particularly proud of. It is good to see that National has come round to supporting the interest-free student loan scheme, albeit probably temporarily. We hope that it continues to support the scheme. We also think that there is actually a compelling case for passing this Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Amendment Bill in a bit of a hurry because of the looming deadlines involved in this legislation, unlike some of the other bills that have gone through the House under this current, somewhat shambolic, urgency session. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI am pleased that the Minister of Revenue managed to get to the Chamber in time to make his second reading speech\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2d4e084b9c34bd494f6b5df933b24da\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Just.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d35798c48fb14944b31dc9afd6dc3c7f\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014only just\u2014because we nearly missed the opportunity to debate it altogether. I am pleased that he made it here. He probably was not expecting the Government to completely mess up the procedural motions on the previous bill, and he would have thought he had a little bit more time to get down here, but he had to rush down to the Chamber instead. On behalf of the House, I thank him for getting here in time so that we can debate this bill today as part of this urgency motion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI mentioned before that I was pleased that the Government seemed to have come around to the idea of interest-free student loans. In fact, it seems to have come round to the idea of interest-free loans in general. Interest-free loans for Ministers who use ministerial credit cards appear to be the order of the day at the moment. I understand that the Government is a man down on the other side of the House today. The only real question is whether that member will pay interest on the money he is paying back. As the Government wants to make students who leave the country pay interest on their student loans, I ask whether Phil Heatley will have to pay interest on the credit card money that he is paying back. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI find it ironic that we are here talking about the interest-free student loan scheme at a time when the Government has already announced that it will be relooking at all of the issues relating to student support. The question that is on the minds of all students at the moment is what that means. Does that mean interest-free student loans are for the chop? Does it mean that their allowances are for the chop? Does it mean that the fees will go up? The students do not know, because the statements coming from John Key and Steven Joyce are sufficiently vague that students have no idea what is looming round the corner. I am concerned that the Government is starting to soften up the ground in order to do away with interest-free student loans. I am pretty confident that it will not do it in this term of Parliament, but I do not have any confidence that it would not do so in the next term of Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EWhen we look at the comments John Key made when the interest-free student loan scheme was introduced in the first place, it is pretty clear to us that he was fundamentally opposed to the idea. What did he say? He said: \u201CWhat a cost \u2026 What an unaffordable and irresponsible cost to the country!\u201D. That was what John Key said when the policy was first announced. He called it \u201Crushed and reckless,\u201D. He said: \u201COur caucus would never have signed off a zero percent interest rate because the economics are just so bad. It has never for us, because we have standards.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EWell, I am not sure that the Government really wants to be talking about standards in education at the moment\u2014not today. I am not sure that Government members will want to talk about standards in many areas today, although at least we are having question time today at 2 o\u2019clock\u2014hopefully. I think the Government can expect a few more questions on standards in education during question time today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EAs my colleague Grant Robertson said, John Key said that he would fight the interest-free student loan scheme with every bone in his body.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220973595d16754d4c8543a2be25362272\u0022\u003EGrant Robertson\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re still looking for the bones.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce004ccb7554435ea9e57338c6ebac3a\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: We are still looking for the bones, because in this Parliament we have a bill that actually extends some of the provisions of the interest-free student loan scheme. They are sensible provisions. They are provisions that the Labour Party has supported and will continue to support, such as extending interest-free student loans to borrowers in Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, and the Ross Dependency. The bill also extends interest-free student loans to students who are enrolled with a New Zealand education provider and are engaged in full-time study overseas, under either a formal exchange programme approved by the Government or a formal agreement between a New Zealand tertiary provider and an overseas tertiary provider. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI will flag one issue for the Minister for Revenue, and he might like some advance warning that I will raise it during the Committee stage. I understand that although the interest-free student loan scheme will be extended to those studying overseas, at the moment it covers diplomats living overseas on a posting but not their partners. Diplomats\u2019 partners who move overseas on a posting are not eligible for an interest-free student loan but the diplomats are. It is possibly an anomaly in the scheme that the Government may want to think about correcting, because ultimately the partner is on a posting as part of a Government contingent as well, and I am not sure that there should be a distinction whereby diplomats\u2019 partners do not get an interest-free loan when the diplomats do. I have not had time to check that out thoroughly, but I am pretty confident that it is currently the case, and I think it is something that the Government might like to look at. It seems to me to be quite consistent with the goals of this bill for that matter to be addressed during the Committee stage. We want to make sure that all New Zealanders who meet the criteria for interest-free student loans are able to get them and are not disqualified based on a technicality. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI come back to the Prime Minister\u2019s statement earlier in the year. John Key said he would \u201Ctake a careful look at the policy settings around student support\u201D. As I said, everybody wants to know what that means and where that leaves the interest-free student loans policy. A lot of students will have heard the things that the National Government has said about interest-free student loans in the past, and they will want to know whether they mean that interest is on the way back or whether other changes to the tertiary education system that will leave them worse off are likely. National\u2019s track record on tertiary education is not actually all that flash, and its track record on keeping its promises on tertiary education is not all that flash. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI was not a tertiary education student in the 1990s, but I can remember back that far. I remember when Lockwood Smith travelled the length and breadth of the country signing pledges that he would resign if student fees were not abolished altogether. Over the next 9 years that National was in Government, student tuition fees increased massively, and National introduced the student loan scheme as the way to pay for them. So not only did National weasel out of the promise it made to students but also it then found another way to impose more and more costs on students. That was how the student loan scheme came about. The whole student loan scheme is the result of a broken National Party election promise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EWhen people hear National members saying they will not change the interest-free student loan scheme, I do not think they will have much confidence in that when they also hear John Key saying things like the Government will take a careful look at the policy settings around student support, all of which points to the fact that National is looking at the issue. Last year, when Bill English and Anne Tolley were challenged by the Opposition over whether they had asked Treasury to look at the cost of abolishing the interest-free student loan scheme or at the potential revenue they would gain from abolishing the scheme, they did not deny that they had done so. To this day National has not denied that it asked Treasury to put together the costings and the projections involved in removing the interest-free student loan scheme. That is something that students up and down the country will be worried about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EThe interest-free student loan scheme, as I said at the beginning, is a policy that we on this side of the House are very proud of. It allows students to repay their loans much, much faster they would have done under the previous regime, when interest continued to mount to the point where some students were struggling to even make the interest payments let alone to pay back the principal. Of course, under the National Government that existed prior to 1999, students were charged interest even while they were studying. Although they had no ability to earn any income to pay back the loan, they were still being charged interest, and their loan at the time of graduation was significantly more than they had been required to borrow to pay for their fees or their living costs. There was cumulative interest over the 3 years, or 5 years in some cases, that they had been studying. Labour thought that was unfair, and it was one of the first things the previous Labour Government did away with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EWe are pleased that this National Government has so far kept the interest-free student loans policy. We are worried that National appears to want to take that away, and that all the things it is doing are preparing the ground for the reintroduction of interest on student loans, and for the imposition of further cost on tertiary students, which can act only as a barrier to our lifting the wage rates, the productivity, and the economic standing of New Zealand. An educated workforce is the way that we increase those things, and interest-free student loans are an important part of the policy mechanism by which we encourage people into tertiary study.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022 data-id=\u00224dde9413527a45cca9ce4ffdc508f560\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224dde9413527a45cca9ce4ffdc508f560\u0022\u003EAMY ADAMS (National\u2014Selwyn):\u003C/span\u003E I do not intend to take up much of the House\u2019s time on this bill. I want to make a contribution about a point that my colleague, Louise Upston, touched on, which is something I have not heard discussed so far in this debate. I come back to the fact that this bill is a revenue bill; it is in the name of the Minister of Revenue, Peter Dunne. I just want to make a contribution wearing my Finance and Expenditure Committee hat, I guess, even though that committee did not consider this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003EOne of the issues that the Finance and Expenditure Committee has been very much engaged in is the management of tax debt, and I think that in looking at student loans we cannot overlook the fact that they are a $10 billion chunk of the Government\u2019s books. They are a serious and significant part of the Government\u2019s accounts, and steps such as those in this bill will help manage that tax debt. We know that that debt is spiralling out of all control, and Opposition members agree with us on that. We have to get a handle on tax debt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003EThe part of this bill that introduces the ability of the Inland Revenue Department to put up compulsory payments from 10 percent to 15 percent when borrowers have been in default, in terms of having the correct deductions made, is an important part. It is important for managing our tax debt. The other thing it is important for is legislating consequences for borrowers who fail to live up to their obligations, and that is something I fundamentally agree with. If borrowers do not ensure that correct deductions are made, there should be a legislative consequence for that action. If that means moving to 15 percent until the indebtedness is cleared, and if that encourages borrowers to be more compliant, to be more aware, and to take more responsibility for their obligations, then that can be only a good thing. I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u00223af013e37c0f4dccbc62f380c207fda2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223af013e37c0f4dccbc62f380c207fda2\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am very happy to stand and take a call on the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I may be one of the few young members of Parliament who currently still have a student loan and are still paying it off. I am nearly there. It has taken me 9 years, but I am nearly there. So I do have a heart for our students out there who are taking out student loans with the best intentions: trying to get ahead in this world, and trying to do good things for themselves and their families.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThe Labour members are supporting this bill. I will talk first about aspects of the bill that we support. One of those is the fact that the bill extends interest-free student loans to borrowers who are resident in Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, or the Ross Dependency. I think that is a good idea. One of the things that we came across on the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee trip to Niue last year was the fact that Niue is suffering from depopulation. If we can encourage Niueans to go back and work and contribute to their economy there\u2014and it is the same with the Cook Islands and other countries\u2014then that is a good thing that New Zealand can do. Those countries talk about the fact that their Pacific people are contributing here in New Zealand, so I think it is important that we allow them the opportunity to go back and contribute to their countries, especially given that we have something like 22,000 Niueans in this country and there are only 1,000 in their homeland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003ESome of the concerns that have been raised in respect of this bill are about the National Government\u2019s future plans for students loans. This kind of bill makes alarm bells go off in our heads. We are concerned about some of the comments that have been made on student loans recently by both the Prime Minister and the new Minister for Tertiary Education, Steven Joyce. The fact is that the Prime Minister has recently said the Government will take a careful look at the policy settings around student support. The concern is that\u2014and we do not trust the Government to take this scheme seriously\u2014National members have talked many times about the number of students who are rorting the system, apparently. Apparently, we have heard from Government members and from the media, students are doing things like taking out student loans then saving the money because it is interest-free. That is very much a small, small minority of the students who access student loans. The vast majority are people who need the student loan scheme in order to have the opportunity to take up tertiary study in the same way that those who have money do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003ESo it is concerning to hear the National members talk about student loans and changing the policy around them, because we do not know how far down the track National will go. Of the something like 13 years that I spent living in Auckland, I spent 11 years working at the University of Auckland or studying there. I have worked with a large number of students\u2014M\u0101ori, Pacific, single parents\u2014who rely on the fact that they can access student loans. If there are to be any changes down the track that jeopardise the accessibility of student loans, then this country will be in huge trouble. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EMr Key referred to the fact that some students do not take their study seriously or do not get a job quickly after qualifying. One thing that we need to recognise is that research shows that, unfortunately, M\u0101ori and Pacific students often take longer than other students to complete their degrees. The reason for that is not anything to do with their having lesser intelligence or anything like that; unfortunately, what we see is that many of the M\u0101ori and Pacific students are still the first person from their family to go on to high-level tertiary education. The culture of the environment at universities is very foreign, compared with what they have ever experienced in their lives. When they go into that environment, many of them struggle to come to terms with being in it. It is completely strange and foreign, compared with what they have ever experienced before. So if the Government does go down the track of putting limitations on student loans, it will be those M\u0101ori and Pacific students, and also\u2014I will talk more about this shortly\u2014solo parents, who will suffer more than anyone else because of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EOne of my colleagues has already talked about the fact that the training incentive allowance was cut. We have been receiving emails since that was announced in the May Budget from women who do not know how they will be able to cope with tertiary-level study, with degree-level study, if they do not have that tertiary incentive allowance. If we put limitations on student loans, that will only further serve to marginalise that group. Those are aspects that we are concerned about. It is important that we alert members on the Government side of the House to those concerns so that when they are looking at the policy, and when they are looking at further legislation, they will take those considerations seriously. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThe Greens brought up their concern about increasing the amount that students who are in arrears will have taken from their earnings under this legislation. The increase will be from 10c in the dollar to 15c in the dollar. The Greens have raised a valid concern. But as my colleague the Hon Maryan Street referred to before, we have to make sure that people are using the correct tax codes and are not trying to rort the system in any way. Again, the thing that we need to be cautious about, and that the Government needs to watch very carefully, is that it is not certain groups that are affected by the introduction of this clause. We know that M\u0101ori, Pacific people, and women will earn less once they get out into the workforce after completing their tertiary studies. If they are solo parents with children to raise, then increasing the amount from 10c in the dollar to 15c in the dollar may affect their ability to look after their families. Those are some of the things that the Government will need to watch very carefully. We do not want to push through legislation that may marginalise particular groups. That was one of the Green Party\u2019s valid concerns. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EAs I said before, the direction that the Government seems to be taking with regard to student loans is concerning. As my colleague Chris Hipkins pointed out earlier, the National Government does not have a good track record with regard to tertiary education\u2014it does not have a good track record on tertiary education. Fundamentally, underneath all the rhetoric National did not, and it does not, support access to student loans. As I yelled out before to one of the National Party MPs, the chances are that the daughter she spoke of did not have to access a student loan. The chances are that anyone who is working here can afford to pay the fees for his or her child. Not everyone has access to that kind of support, so we need to make sure as a country that we support those who do not have access to that type of money to go on to tertiary-level education. That is one of the things that we do not trust this Government to do. We do not trust this Government to make sure that every New Zealander has an equal opportunity to access tertiary education. That issue has come up in the past. National voted against policies that the Labour Government put forward in its 9 years. Those policies and legislation were conducive to ensuring that all New Zealanders have access to tertiary education. As we head into the future we are aware of the fact that, if given the opportunity, the National Government would make changes that would be detrimental to some of the more marginalised groups in New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EI also say the Government needs to take aspects of the student loan scheme seriously. I saw many students come into my office, over the years while I was working at the university, who had been put back or affected negatively by some of the operational matters of student loans: some of the timeliness issues, and things like that. When students have to wait for 6 weeks to receive money in the first semester of the year, they are severely put back in terms of their ability to go to classes\u2014sometimes they are actually shut out\u2014and their ability to obtain their course outlines and everything else. That can have a detrimental effect on their success in that first semester, or even in that first year. So there are other matters related to the student loan scheme that this Government needs to take very seriously and look at in order to make sure that the scheme works successfully and efficiently for students who need to access student loans. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWe have pointed out that, at the end of the day, if further changes are made to the student loan scheme and accessibility to it is affected by the Government\u2019s ideology on whether student loans should be interest-free or on how accessible they should be, it will be M\u0101ori, Pacific, and, I think, women students, as well, who will be most affected by any possible changes that the Government may go down the track of making. We are concerned about that. We have discussed it very broadly amongst our caucus. We are keeping our eye very closely on the situation, to ensure that the groups that I have discussed are not affected negatively by the Government\u2019s future policy on tertiary education and the student loan scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022 data-id=\u002212e14bcdc69f42df864f8bb2bd413b1d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002212e14bcdc69f42df864f8bb2bd413b1d\u0022\u003EDAVID GARRETT (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill is a good bill but not a great bill, and ACT supports it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e494810a87a7480199d856916885149b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments recommended by the Education and Science Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 113\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EQuestion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222925cc4f977e43cf9e68fa8c32871b2d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 113\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022138fe3d26fcd466ea562079db5354339\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00223adeb5231ca743168da4575e75d00c53\u0022\u003EPart 1  Amendments to principal Act\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u00229aa95895fe484c0b92549949faf73e5e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229aa95895fe484c0b92549949faf73e5e\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak now to the Committee stage of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, which is where we get down to some of the nuts and bolts around this legislation. But I have to say, to begin with, that it is very timely the legislation has reappeared on the Order Paper now, because between the time this bill was first introduced and referred to the Education and Science Committee, and the time when it has come back for its second reading, a number of signals have come from the Government about tertiary students, and in particular about the loan scheme. Here we have legislation that Labour will support, but about which we are unsure there is a long-term prognosis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EMost recently we have had the Prime Minister\u2019s statement, at the beginning of this session of Parliament in 2010, when he referred to the fact that the Government would \u201Ctake a careful look at the policy settings around student support\u201D. That led me, and other Labour members, to ask what on earth that meant. What does that mean? Will the Government make student allowances and loans harder to access? In the drive to cut costs, is the Government seeing the cost of student loans and student allowances as simply an impost on the Government coffers, without recognising the extent of the investment they represent in tertiary education? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EA Government of a different hue, particularly if the hue were red, might have seen fit, in fact, to invest more in tertiary education, not less, in order for New Zealand to escalate out of a recession, and in order for us to equip ourselves as a country with the kind of economic growth and development we aspire to, and with the kinds of wages and incomes we aspire to. But the only signals we have received from the Government are signals that contradict Part 1 of this bill, and those signals are about making things harder for students. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis bill\u2014and most of the relevant provisions are in Part 1\u2014in fact extends the scope of student loans to others who live in what has been quaintly called for a long time \u201Cthe realm of New Zealand\u201D. At least it now appears quaint, but it is those countries such as Niue, Tokelau, and the Cook Islands, which are constitutionally and in every other way dependent upon New Zealand, and which will now be embraced and brought into the scope of the student loans provision that currently exists. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003ESo here we have a bill that extends the scope of student loans at a time when the Government is saying that it will cut back, or look at cutting back, on opportunities for people to access tertiary education. Let me just underscore that point for a moment, by referring to a statement made recently, an article in the paper that appeared recently, about the Universal College of Learning, the polytechnic centred in Palmerston North with satellite campuses in Wanganui and Masterton. Its chief executive, Paul McElroy, has been saying he will have to cut back on student admissions in order to meet the Government\u2019s requirements\u2014to cut back on student admissions and entry to the Universal College of Learning. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThat is a tragedy. Just at the moment when we are looking for people to upskill and reskill, this Government is putting in place pressures and parameters that will make our tertiary institutions turn students away. The student cap is not something set in stone; it is something negotiated. This Government should lift that cap in order to ensure that we have the kind of skilled workforce that will take us into the future. People in tertiary education, whether in a trade or an apprenticeship, or at a polytech, w\u0101nanga, or university, will be the people who will provide the economic development of New Zealand, and the future sustainability of that economic development. But that is being shut down by this Government at exactly the time when we are looking at legislation to extend access to tertiary education. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EWe in Labour believe in extending that access. We also believe that students should pay back their loans. Loans are not called loans for nothing; they need to be paid back. Therefore, there should be some incentives, and this bill also provides additional incentives to encourage people not to default on their loans but to do their best to repay them. As a rejoinder, a complementary clause, in that respect, the bill also extends the hardship provisions. This bill extends the hardship provisions so that in the case of students legitimately not being able to repay their loans at the rate that has been determined, there is scope for the hardship provisions to be enacted beyond the immediate tax year. That is important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003ESo we do not think that the bill is unbalanced, in that respect. Yes, it raises the cost of defaulting from 10c in the dollar to 15c in the dollar, but it does provide additional hardship coverage. That represents an investment, but this Government, by its signals from the Prime Minister, and more recently by the very explicit declaration of the new Minister of Tertiary Education, Steven Joyce, has shown that it wants to make it harder. The Government wants to make it harder to access skills and education, and that is what the problem is here. The problem is that we have a Government talking out of both sides of its mouth, and that is problematic. It will be problematic in the long term, and it will be problematic in the short term, for institutions that are under extraordinary pressure at the moment, and that are in the situation, like that of the Universal College of Learning, of turning students away. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThat is not what should be happening in the escalation out of a recession. It is short-sighted of this Government, and it will cost us dearly in the future. There are some things that a Government must invest in. Other Governments are doing so. Australia, the United States, and the UK are investing heavily in tertiary education. This Government is going in the opposite direction, at 100 miles an hour, and that is wrong; it is not appropriate. Although Labour supports this bill and the provisions in Part 1, we need to set this in context. A dangerous collision is about to happen in the Government\u2019s tertiary education policy\u2014a dangerous collision. We have people aspiring to upskill, and to improve themselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis is not just about going to university. This is about accessing tertiary education opportunities across the gamut. We have seen what the Government has done with adult and community education, which is low-cost, accessible education in the community. The Government has axed it. It has disappeared off the face of parts of our country, and it limps on in a skeletal form in other parts. That is a disservice to the skills development that needs to occur in this country. This bill, which Labour supports, goes in a different direction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022 data-id=\u0022f09dab389bcb4c99bbc5f91d6fddea13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f09dab389bcb4c99bbc5f91d6fddea13\u0022\u003EGARETH HUGHES (Green):\u003C/span\u003E Kia ora, Mr Chair. He mihi nui ki a koutou, kia ora. To answer Carmel Sepuloni\u2019s question, I am one who has a student loan and was a student last year, and I am excited about the opportunity to participate in this debate. I will talk a little about the reasons why the Green Party is opposed to this bill. I first started studying in 2000, towards a Bachelor of Arts degree at Victoria University, and of course, because my parents are not wealthy, I had to take out a student loan. Ever since then, every couple of months I receive a new letter in the mail from the Inland Revenue Department saying how big my student loan is, and it is so discouraging to have to look at that $30,000 figure. Like many people of my generation, I want to buy a house, I want to start setting up a superannuation fund, and I want to put money aside for my son\u2019s education so that he does not have to take out a student loan, and this letter is one of the most discouraging ones I ever receive in the mail. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EEver since the student loan scheme was introduced, students in New Zealand essentially have been paying an education tax. Every fortnight 10 percent of my gross pay is deducted straight away and paid towards my student loan repayments. What we are talking about in this bill is, for some, like a tax increase. I congratulate the decision made in 2005 to reduce the interest payable on student loans. When I first started studying in 2000, I had to pay interest on my loan while I was studying. I thought this was ridiculous. I think we need to listen to the students associations on this issue, the other people who can talk for students who call this bill unmanageable and unaffordable. The student loan scheme is a public good. We cannot be looking at it as though it is just a cost to the economy. This scheme is a public good. If we are to increase our GDP, if we are to race Australia in wage increases, we need to make education more accessible. We need more people developing skills, if we are to live in a sustainable and innovative economy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EThis bill makes some changes to the student loan scheme. Some are good, some are all right, and some are bad. I turn first to the good changes. The bill extends interest-free loans to borrowers in Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, and the Ross Dependency, and to students enrolled with a New Zealand education provider or engaged in full-time study overseas under a formal exchange programme. This is a good move. It extends the interest-free student loan provision, which was such a benefit to me, to other students. This provision supports our Pacific neighbours and builds stronger relationships. I turn to the changes that are all right. This bill replaces the interest rate, where applicable, and sets it by formula. The proposed formula is identical to the formula currently in use. The change is to take it out of regulation, and put it into the principal Act. We are fine with this provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EThen there are the bad changes. This bill enables the Commissioner of Inland Revenue to increase the standard rate for deductions from salaries and wages from 10 percent to 15 percent. For borrowers who have failed to have the correct deductions made, the increased deductions will apply until any under-deductions, including late repayment penalties, have been fully repaid. Compulsory student loan repayments already kick in at a very low threshold. Increasing the deduction to 15c in the dollar will have a severe impact on some borrowers, their families, and their children. The current threshold is set at $19,084 gross. I ask whether any members in this House could survive on seeing 15 percent of their gross income going straight back to the Inland Revenue Department, on top of GST increases, rent, food, and other costs. For some, this is another tax increase that they will be seeing this year. An amount of $19,084 is very hard to live on. I ask whether any members could live on that amount. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EWhat do we need to do with this bill? The Green Party believes that the student loan scheme is already a heavy burden on many students on low incomes, and on students who do not have high-paying jobs after they leave tertiary education. We oppose all initiatives that increase that burden. Despite the useful technical amendments\u2014and we support the idea that students in the Cook Islands, Tokelau, and others should have the benefit of interest-free student loans\u2014we will not be supporting this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022878b211bf6a347019b227028144d3f53\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the next speaker, I say to the member that when he goes for the call he must remain standing. If he were to sit down he would forfeit his right to speak. I knew the member was going for the call so I was happy to give it to the member. I say well done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022 data-id=\u00227de8fa18cf4a44db87a7ddd9060a7ad4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227de8fa18cf4a44db87a7ddd9060a7ad4\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour\u2014New Lynn):\u003C/span\u003E Firstly, I acknowledge the member who has just resumed his seat, Gareth Hughes. We enjoyed his maiden speech, and it is good to see him participating in this debate as a student loan holder. I had a student loan, too, but it was in the bad old days when we had to get our loans from a bank, rather than from the Government. Yes, it did look discouraging for a pretty good while.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003ELabour supports the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, and I might say I still do not understand why the Greens do not. Much of it is about extending the coverage of the student loan provisions, and that has to be good. In particular, we support the extension to students living in Realm of New Zealand countries, because they deserve the same constitutional privileges in this regard as people living within the standard New Zealand territorial boundary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EI will begin by taking a step back and positioning this bill within the general ethos of the Labour Party\u2019s approach to the question of tertiary study. It is fundamental to us\u2014and it will always, I believe, be fundamental to us\u2014that all citizens have the same, if you like, ethical value and moral worth, and they all deserve the same opportunities to thrive and to make the very best of themselves in life. That is why we are for the many, not the few. We think that if opportunities are spread equally, not only do we improve the welfare of our community and strengthen our economy, because equal societies perform better economically, but we provide social mobility. We provide the opportunity for the son or daughter of\u2014I used to study in Wales\u2014a miner to aspire to all the same opportunities as the son or daughter of a doctor does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThat approach is something that many members in this House have benefited from. Even some members opposite make a big deal of growing up in a State house or benefiting from the State education. What angers us is when we believe that members opposite are pulling up the ladder after themselves. Those kids who went to the State school or benefited from the State house have an extra obligation to make sure that today\u2019s generation has the same opportunities that they had.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThat is why we are always a little suspicious when there is, I have to say, some ambiguity. The ambiguity is not so much in the bill as in the statements that various Ministers and members opposite have made. The Prime Minister, for example, said that he wants to take a careful look at the policy settings around student support. Well, we wonder what that actually means. The policy is pretty clear: a student can take out an interest-free student loan, and approximately 75 percent of the costs of a student\u2019s tertiary study in New Zealand is covered by the State. That is so we do not create worse barriers to all young New Zealand people having access to education.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EAs the Opposition spokesperson on finance I am well aware that that could not be more important than during a recession. Large, large numbers of young people are unemployed. Over 45,000 15 to 19-year-olds\u201412,000 more than at the same time a year ago\u2014are unemployed. That number increases to over 72,000 young New Zealanders if we include the 20 to 24 age group. As my colleague and friend Carmel Sepuloni noted, M\u0101ori and Pasifika students, and I would add students from migrant backgrounds, are overrepresented in those statistics, because in a recession it is last on, first off. In my electorate of New Lynn, which I am passionate about, 13.5 percent of my constituents are Pasifika, 9 percent are M\u0101ori, and, wait for it, 23 percent are of Asian origin, many of them brand new. By the way, the average income of the Asian population in my electorate is lower than that of either the Pasifika or the M\u0101ori, because they are the most recent arrivals and are struggling to make their way in the job market. It is absolutely essential, if we are to walk the talk about being a proud, independent, egalitarian country that stands up for decency, fairness, and the Kiwi way, that we have an education system that is open to all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EMembers opposite often talk about freedom. Well, freedom is not just the absence of regulation, folks. Freedom and personal responsibility can be real only if we are free to do something because we are empowered and resourced to do it. There is an old philosophical debate about the question \u201CAm I free to dine at the Ritz?\u201D. Well, there is no law against it, but, guys, if we cannot pay the bill we cannot eat there. You are free to dine at the Ritz, and you are free to get a tertiary education\u2014not you, Mr Chairperson; I am sure you had a fine education\u2014one is free to get a tertiary education, only if one can get a student loan to meet the costs of attendance, and if one is not charged exorbitant fees for the privilege of doing so. Labour is now, will be tomorrow, and will always be 100 percent supportive of a strong tertiary education system with universal access to it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EI commend a couple of things in this bill. I have mentioned the extraterritorial extension. Also, I echo my Green colleague in saying that as a former Associate Minister of Revenue I support the idea of moving the formula into the primary legislation, and not leaving it in regulations. First, the formula is too important, and, second, I think moving it settles any argument about whether the regulation should be amended. It takes pressure off the Minister when it is Parliament\u2019s voice that has set the formula. That reflects the importance that Parliament should accord to a good student loan scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EAs I have said, the inbuilt irony\u2014and I do not want to be unfair to members opposite\u2014is that we keep getting mixed signals from National members about whether their hearts are really in it with regard to the student loan scheme. Steven Joyce admitted that endorsing it in 2008 was only a political call. Well, it seems that for that Minister everything is only a political call. What would he support even if the focus groups told him not to? What is so sacrosanct to Mr Joyce that it is beyond polling? I do not know what it is\u2014and he has been in this Chamber for 15 months.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EBy the way, I say to Mr Joyce\u2014if he is listening\u2014that a single millimetre of broadband in the ground would be a really good idea. There was about $300 million worth ready to go 15 months ago when he cancelled the Broadband Investment Fund. That, of course, is very important to students, because they are high users of broadband. I slip that in there, as they say\u2014surgically insert that broadband point. It would be a diversion to go on about the parlous state of the telecommunications industry at the moment, so I will stop there. I am sure Mr Joyce is having a very busy day\u2014apparently not as busy as the Prime Minister\u2019s, however. He will be very concerned about the conduct of the House and the shambolic nature of the Government\u2019s business. What an interesting week it has been for the Government, has it not? It throws the House into urgency for such matters of colossal importance as this bill. Worthy though it is and supporting it as we are, why are we debating it in urgency in the dead of the morning? Why are we doing it in urgency? Why could it not be accorded a normal legislative process? Is the Government\u2019s management of the House so terrible that it has\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237f8b2aa7ab24164b0175654287cb2f3\u0022\u003ECatherine Delahunty\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235ffa58f42eb45d59144237e327e8fde\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I believe it is. I think we have seen that demonstrated. I take the opportunity to commend our whips\u2014Mr Mallard and Mr Hughes\u2014and Mr Hipkins, who has been supporting them. I think we have seen a pretty good example of constructive use by the Opposition of House procedure to assist the smooth functioning of the House. Of course, we are very grateful for your role, Mr Chairperson, and that of the Assistant Speakers, and the role of the Office of the Clerk, in assisting the Government to get through its morning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EI come back to the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. It is definitely worthy of support. Labour will support it, because we are not about petty politics. We are about doing what is right for New Zealand, and we are happy, as an Opposition, to see the Government doing things that we agree with. We are not here just to oppose, carp, and whine; we are here to do what is right for New Zealanders. The difference between the two sides of the House is that we are about the many, not the few. Too often we see members opposite doing what is in the interest of the few, not the many. Today we stand behind this small bill, which further strengthens and broadens access to education for all New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022 data-id=\u0022832fb2d4efb64d2fb460efcbeaf46c3a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022832fb2d4efb64d2fb460efcbeaf46c3a\u0022\u003ECATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Chairperson. I was on the Education and Science Committee that examined the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, and I found it a positive experience. Green members have a positive view of the bill, even though we are opposing it. We are not carping and whining, as much as asserting the value of a student loan scheme that does not punish people who are already in trouble. That is why we are voting against the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThere were only five submitters to the committee, and only two of them made oral presentations. They all made valid points. Everyone was supportive of the extension of interest-free loans to borrowers from the Pacific and the Ross Dependency, etc. In relation to those students undertaking full-time overseas study under a New Zealand Government - approved formal exchange programme, there was some debate over the detail of that second proposal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThe New Zealand University Students Association made some really important points when it appeared before us. As the body representing a large number of students, its voice is regarded by us as being particularly pertinent to any bill that amends the student loan scheme. Many of us have theoretical or parental interest in how the scheme works, but the New Zealand University Students Association is working on the front line of the effects on students of this credit and debt system. The association supported much of the bill, including the technical amendment allowing borrowers returning to Aotearoa New Zealand, who wished to repay their loans before meeting the 183-day requirement for an interest-free student loan, to be able to do so. It strongly supported that amendment. However, it strongly opposed the Commissioner of Inland Revenue being able to raise the compulsory repayment deduction from the salary and wages of borrowers to 15c in the dollar when payments were overdue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EGreen members were at least part of stopping the Inland Revenue Department from putting penalties on students whom the department itself had failed to notify of overdue debt. As the association pointed out, this is the worse possible time, with unemployment, and especially youth unemployment, increasing, and the increasing cost of living, to add extra penalties to people who are indebted. I know that some members of the select committee will never agree with me, but some very poor people are not lazy and unmotivated. They just do not have enough money to cover all their costs. We have encouraged poorer people to see education as the solution to poverty, and to go and get that education. We have made them pay for that education, and now we are punishing those who are not able to keep up repayments. At the end of their studies there is absolutely no guarantee for many people, including women, migrants, and refugees, and t\u0101ngata whenua and Pasifika people\u2014let alone students with disabilities, who are the most discriminated against group of people in this entire country in terms of employment opportunity\u2014to get a well-paying job that will help them keep up with the level of debt, and to have a consistent earning record that will allow them to keep up with their payments and not get overdue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003ESome of the discussion in the select committee expressed a highly punitive approach to the problem of unpaid student debt, which is similar to comments I hear in this Chamber and elsewhere about beneficiaries. There are the good and the motivated, but then there are the bad and the disorganised, and the latter must be made to pay. This kind of thinking is a result of the scheme itself. It has not only created inequity but it has exposed inequity. Some of us were able to contribute to some part of our children\u2019s educational costs, and some of us were not, but a loan is a loan and it must be repaid. All of this is inevitably unfair when the core of universality is abandoned in favour of market forces, and the bloodless coup of the 1980s is still framing our education system and its debates, our accident compensation, our health debates, and our economy as a whole. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThere is always one question to be asked of each bill before the House: who really benefits? In terms of this bill, the Inland Revenue Department will benefit. But who really cares about the social chaos that ripples outwards for every increase in student debt repayment rates? On that basis, we oppose this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u0022b5dd000d4ecf4aab87d65637142a8a1f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b5dd000d4ecf4aab87d65637142a8a1f\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will touch on something that Gareth Hughes said in respect of commending the Labour Government for taking interest off student loans in 2005. I have to say, as someone who had a student loan, that prior to that happening I did not see my loan go down very much; I need to mention that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db0fcff79dd042eb9fbd4db6cf6a53e6\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: Did you graduate?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257784da3a4b04e1da8864081d516e055\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I tell Mr Garrett that I graduated. I will do something along the lines of what Maryan Street was doing and just look at aspects of this bill in relation to the public comments that have been made recently on the student loan scheme and the National Party\u2019s history with respect to the tertiary education system in general. But I will do my best to stick to the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWe have discussed Labour\u2019s support for the aspect of this bill that will mean that those from territories of New Zealand\u2014Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, and the Ross Dependency\u2014will be able to have interest-free student loans. One thing has just come up in discussions with colleagues. I guess this question is directed to the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Revenue; it would be nice if he were listening to my question. We support these students getting interest-free loans when they return to their homeland, whether it be Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, or the Ross Dependency. My question is whether the Government has taken into consideration any additional measures or mechanisms that may need to be put in place to ensure that those students who return to the Cook Islands, Niue, Tokelau, or the Ross Dependency\u2014I do not know who lives there\u2014actually have some sort of mechanism for paying back their student loans. That is one thing we do not see in the existing bill at this stage; I have asked my colleagues who were on the select committee, and they are unsure about that one, too. So we would like a response from the Minister with regard to that question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWe totally recognise that it is important that those who wish to return to the territories of New Zealand have the opportunity to do so in order that they can contribute to their people and to their communities, but we need to make sure that some measures are in place, because if they go there for a lifetime and they have left this country with a $40,000 student loan, then we would like to see that it be paid back. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThat is one aspect that we have covered. I will just talk about that aspect, too, in relation to what we have seen recently with public comments on the student loan scheme. This bill is basically saying that we support our students from the territories of New Zealand, and that we provide them with the same opportunities and provisions, with regard to interest-free loans, that those who live in New Zealand get. But I am concerned about the public comments that allude to the fact that this Government may go down the track of making student loans less accessible, which will unfortunately affect those who are marginalised or under-represented in our tertiary education system as it stands. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThe reason I am raising it is that on the one hand it looks like we are supporting Pacific students from territories of New Zealand to be able to go back to their countries and contribute there, but on the other hand it looks like this National Government is at the same time going down the track of limiting the opportunities for students who need to access student loans, so that they can do that. That is a very valid concern, and I am sure that even though we are in the Committee stage in discussing the bill, public comments that have been made recently on the student loan scheme also need to be taken into consideration, as in some ways it feels like there is a sense of contradiction in respect of what this bill is saying and what is being said publicly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWhen we look through Part 1, we see that another aspect of this bill is that late payment penalties will be put in place for those who are not using the correct tax codes and for those who may be perceived to be trying to rort the system in some way in respect of actually paying off their student loans when they get into employment. We support that aspect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f4d7dd4e404746f4a52f8ee9ad95fffa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f4d7dd4e404746f4a52f8ee9ad95fffa\u0022\u003EKELVIN DAVIS (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E It is great to have an opportunity to speak to the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. In particular, I make note of the part that extends our responsibilities to our relations from Niue, Tokelau, and the Cook Islands. I think that as a country we need to realise that we are not just an isolated island in the Pacific; we have responsibilities to other countries that depend on us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EWe also have a responsibility to M\u0101ori, to make sure that M\u0101ori have full access to tertiary education, so it was with some concern that we heard that the Minister for Tertiary Education, Steven Joyce, had his eye on student loans. We are not quite sure what that means. A lot of research describes how we need to make tertiary education more accessible for M\u0101ori, and the Starpath research conducted out of Auckland University is something that we need to follow. We need to make it a lot easier for M\u0101ori to get into tertiary education\u2014not just M\u0101ori, but also our Pacific Island relations\u2014instead of making it harder.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EI think it is really important that we realise that student loans are loans, not gifts, and that people who take out loans have to repay them. It is good to see in the bill that the Commissioner of Inland Revenue is able to increase the standard rate for repayment deductions from salary and wages from 10c in the dollar to 15c, for borrowers who have failed to have the correct deductions made or to pay any other amount when it was due. The increased deductions will apply until any shortfall, including any late payment penalties, has been fully repaid. It is really important that we understand that that provision is in the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThe Prime Minister has made the statement that he thinks that some students do not take their study seriously, so they tend to drop out, fail, or not complete studies in the time they should. But many people do not know exactly what they will do when they finish university; they take different courses. My brother, for example, started his tertiary training doing a degree in business studies. Part-way through the first year he realised that it was not for him, so he moved on and swapped to a Bachelor of Arts in M\u0101ori. That, again, was not enough for him. He ended up studying to become a lawyer, and he is now a very successful lawyer. I was one of those people who went to teachers college and did not have to take out a loan. I went to teachers college after the system was in place that paid people to train to become teachers. I was in the middle of my training before the student loan system came about, so I do not actually understand what it is like to have to repay a loan for study. I know that some people have loans that are bigger than many mortgages\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d6bcdb5d2324ef6b8ae30c510286594\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Bigger than Ben-Hur.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b608131e227468495207e6642f02095\u0022\u003EKELVIN DAVIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014bigger than Ben-Hur, as my colleague Chris Hipkins says. That is one of the factors that make it difficult for M\u0101ori to study at a tertiary level. The whole financial situation makes it really difficult. I am talking about a lot of friends and family up north; we struggle to get them to succeed at school in the first place. Then when they do succeed at school they find the financial barriers to move into university are too great for them, and they do not go on to tertiary study in the first place. So the potential of the Minister to remove the interest-free element of the student loans would have a detrimental impact on the number of M\u0101ori who want to go into tertiary education.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EI was seriously concerned with the comment earlier on from the Hon Maurice Williamson that a bit of slash-and-burn never hurt anybody. The distance that some people on the opposite side of the Chamber have from folk on the ground who do struggle in these situations, really concerns me. It is almost like saying that a bit of poverty never hurt anyone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u002211a357a3f96b4bfe95ab41b1855f8028\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211a357a3f96b4bfe95ab41b1855f8028\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (National\u2014Rangitata):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u00223b42607ebe1c41b1b856bd8bff624ee2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223b42607ebe1c41b1b856bd8bff624ee2\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to take a call on the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I wanted, in particular, to ask the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Revenue, a question about the grace period clause in this bill, which is clause 24. This seemingly small and innocuous clause is actually incredibly important. At the moment, when student loan borrowers are advised of their outstanding loan balance, if they repay that amount within 15 days then the interest over that period is cancelled. This bill extends that grace period out to 30 days. My question to the Minister is: how did that 30-day period came about? I know it is a nice round figure; it is a month. I would like to know what went into deciding that a 30-day period would fix this problem. It can be difficult for ex-students who are overseas to make repayments. I have had people contact me who find it extremely difficult sometimes to get their payment in, particularly when they are in a country where they cannot wire money easily. I had a friend who was working in Africa who found it incredibly difficult to work out how to get the money back within the time frame. I am not sure that even 30 days would have been enough for my friend to qualify for this grace period. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThis is an issue that I would like the Minister\u2019s response on. Even though it does not seem like an important issue, sometimes it can be the difference between people deciding whether or not to come home. If they cannot send money easily, if it is too hard, and they will not be able to qualify to have their interest cancelled, then that may be the point at which they say that they have all this interest piled up, but it has been made a whole lot worse, so they will just stay overseas and never come back to New Zealand. Then we would never have the loan paid off, but more important we would not get value from the tertiary education that the New Zealand taxpayer has paid for, alongside the person as well, when he or she studied in New Zealand. I would appreciate the Minister\u2019s comments on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI will also briefly comment on extending this provision to New Zealand territories, which I think is important. During the work that I have done with the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, I met someone from the Cook Islands, who in October last year said to me how desperate they were for this provision to come in. I think we have always been good global citizens. We do not want to pull people away from their homes, particularly when their own economic development is so reliant on their best and brightest being able to return home and not having a financial disincentive to doing that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI commend the contribution from the new member Gareth Hughes. It was nice to see him getting up on his pins so early in his parliamentary career. I know this has become a bit of a time for telling old war stories and one-upmanship, but my colleague Grant Robertson and I went through university at the absolute worst time to go through, which was in the 1990s. Mr Hughes and Carmel Sepuloni went through in 2000, which I understand was bad enough. I know how important the incentives are in this legislation for paying back a student loan. A lot of people who jump to their feet have never had a student loan and do not really understand what it is like to have one. They do not understand what it is like for students to feel, when they graduate, that they will die with this loan because it just gets bigger, despite the fact that they are making repayments. The push to leave the country is then very, very high. In my case, I graduated as a scientist, and scientists do not earn a lot of money in this country. Therefore, I did not earn a lot of money and I had a loan that was growing day by day with compounding interest. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThat is why this legislation is so important. It is important for our Pacific colleagues and the people in the Ross Dependency, which, again, is very useful for scientists. We do some fantastic climate change work down in the Ross Dependency. This may mean that ACT will vote against this legislation now, but it is important that those students are also included in this bill, and I am very pleased to support it. But I would appreciate an answer to my question on the grace period, so we can be sure that it was arrived at by research and considered thought, rather than just being picked because it was a month. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI will also comment on the hardship clause, and commend the Minister for this. I have had people come into my office to say that they have found the current hardship relief clauses, which were unintended consequences of the previous changes to the Act, very difficult to deal with and inflexible in dealing with their own particular hardship situation. This has become a far more difficult issue in the recession. I would be interested in the Minister\u2019s comments as well around what else will be going on in this area. When people have to pay an extra 10 percent of their income towards a student loan, that is a lot of money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022 data-id=\u00220dd98d7e02ae4399ba5f7a9e6d189a50\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220dd98d7e02ae4399ba5f7a9e6d189a50\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue):\u003C/span\u003E I take the call at this point because there have been some 10 speeches in this debate so far on the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I think I have been asked three specific questions, and there is one from the second reading that I also want to respond to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EBefore I do so, it is perhaps important to place this debate in a wider context. A lot has been said about what may or may not happen with regard to the rules for eligibility and the way in which people might take out student loans in the future. The responsibility for this legislation, and my responsibility as the Minister of Revenue, rests with the administration of the student loan scheme, whatever shape or form that might be in. As part of that portfolio, I have to be mindful of a couple of facts. We have a student loan outstanding debt liability\u2014call it what you like\u2014of around $10 billion. We have somewhere in the order of 540,000 student loan borrowers with outstanding balances. We have about 40,000 student loan borrowers offshore, and when we sought to identify them and get their up-to-date details a couple of years ago, we managed to get just under half of those people back into contact with us. The point is that we have this massive debt, which speakers on both sides have acknowledged, that we need to manage. So these changes\u2014and some other changes that were contained in a discussion document released late last year, which will be the subject of legislation later this year\u2014are about making it easier for people to meet what we all regard as their repayment obligations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EIt is against that backdrop that I will comment on the questions that have been raised so far. Carmel Sepuloni raised the question about the repayment mechanism for students in what we quaintly term the realm countries. Before I answer that, I will comment on Moana Mackey\u2019s point. I think she is absolutely right when she talks about the benefit for students in those countries of access to the student loan scheme. One of the drivers for me in being keen to promote that was a visit to the Cook Islands a couple of years ago. I talked to senior school students about their aspirations for their futures and about the practical difficulties they would face, not in getting access to New Zealand universities but in funding their study when they came here. So that was a very important move. Carmel Sepuloni asked what will happen, though, once they complete their studies and return to their country of origin\u2014hopefully, to make that economic and social contribution that this is all about. I draw her attention to the provisions of the bill, which I do not have right in front of me; it is a very long clause number. Students will be required to determine their income level and advise the Inland Revenue Department of that, and then the process for getting their repayments on an annual basis will be put in place. This is a point I will return to in response to some of the other questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EI also make the comment that the changes we are contemplating at the moment will make it much easier for those students, as well, in terms of moving to an electronic base for repayment so that the system, in time, becomes more like the way in which we conduct our banking operations. Students will be able to access their balances and make their repayments as their circumstances fit. That will apply to all students, but it will be particularly beneficial to students in the realm countries.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003ELet me come to the question of the grace period. I have to say that there was no particular science to the choice of the 30-day period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EWe did think that because the major beneficiaries of this change will be students who are overseas, 15 days was probably a little tight in the circumstances. But with today\u2019s technologies and communications, even using the member\u2019s example of the deepest parts of Africa, or somewhere, we thought that 30 days was not an unreasonable choice. Once we bring in the next leg of this legislation, which is in terms of the electronic basis for the system, I think that that operation will become quite manageable, but obviously all of these things will be kept under constant review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EDuring the second reading debate Chris Hipkins raised the question of the partners of diplomats and whether they would be eligible for the extended provisions. That is a much more complicated question than first appears the case. We do not have, within the student loans legislation, a particular provision with regard to that category of person. What we do have is a requirement that a borrower, or the partner of a borrower, is also eligible if he or she is resident for tax purposes in New Zealand during that period. The particular problem that arises for all people who are offshore is the definition of \u201Ctax resident\u201D. In respect of the specific question of the status of diplomats and their partners, this matter has been considered by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Inland Revenue Department, and the Ministry of Education. The conclusion that was reached was that this was an issue that was beyond the specific ambit of the student loans legislation to address, but I guess that it is a matter that will be between those agencies and, again, kept under some form of review. If issues need to be addressed, they will be picked up at that point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EI conclude simply by going back to where I started, and by pointing out to the House that what we are doing here is making a much more effective management process for a very large investment by the New Zealand taxpayer\u2014$10 billion. The vagaries of Government accounting systems mean that that $10 billion is actually shown as an asset on the Crown\u2019s books, so it is incumbent upon the Crown to do what it can: first, to recover that funding; and, second, to make it easier for those who are making repayments to do so. This legislation, and the legislation I am foreshadowing later in the year, will be all about achieving that objective.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022 data-id=\u00225e9994e46b5542358dc29370dc34daa4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225e9994e46b5542358dc29370dc34daa4\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS (Labour\u2014Rimutaka):\u003C/span\u003E I will briefly respond to the comments the Minister made regarding the partners of diplomats. I thank him for that explanation, and I appreciate that it is obviously an issue that is far more complicated than something that can be dealt with in this bill. I hope it is an issue that will not fall through the cracks. Partners of diplomats are leaving New Zealand for the good of New Zealand to be part of representing New Zealand overseas, and it seems very unfair that the person whom they live with could be eligible for an interest-free loan but they themselves might not be eligible for an interest-free loan. I hope that that, in time, is something that will be able to be addressed more fully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI pick up on a comment the Minister made about the size of the asset that is the student loan scheme. I agree it is a significant amount of money on the Government\u2019s books, but we also need to consider it in the wider context of the value of tertiary education, as I am sure the Minister himself does. It is an investment in the people of New Zealand and in building up the skills of our workforce. If we want to have a much more productive economy, one in which we all enjoy a higher standard of living, then encouraging people to move into all forms of tertiary education, whether it be universities, polytechnics, or even workplace training, is something we want to encourage. I hope that whenever we talk about the student loan scheme we will consider it within that context. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI want to talk about one or two of the technical amendments in the bill, and, in particular, the increased deduction rate that is covered in clauses 6 and 7. In effect, these changes will allow the amount deducted from a borrower\u2019s salary and wages to be increased from 10c in the dollar up to 15c in the dollar. The amendment is aimed at borrowers who have failed to have the correct deductions made and have other overdue amounts. This is a change we support, but I want to talk a little bit about the way in which the threshold at which somebody has to make those deductions is established. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EEvery year, up until last year, the threshold at which somebody has to make deductions from their salary has been increased in line with, I think, the rate of inflation\u2014it might be the consumer price index; I am not sure exactly what the mechanism is. But it has been adjusted each year so that that threshold remains the same in real terms, and that was not done in 2010 and 2011. In the statement the Minister put out just before Christmas\u2014I called him a Grinch at the time and I apologise to him for doing so; I think he is a very unlikely Grinch. [Interruption] No, he was Santa\u2019s little helper, I think, in the photographs in the paper. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EIn the statement he put out at the time he said that the decision to hold the student loan repayment threshold at the current level for the coming year takes into account the current economic climate and the very significant costs of this $9.6 billion asset to the Crown. I think we need to be clear that although we are talking about a fairly small amount of money, the principle behind it is, I think, is a really important one in that we are asking the borrowers of student loans to shoulder an extra share of the effects of the tougher economic climate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EThe other point the Minister made in his statement is that although the impact on individual borrowers is likely to be minimal, the effect of maintaining the current repayment threshold is expected to lower the overall costs of the scheme to the Crown. I think we need to be really transparent about that. If the Government is setting out to lower the cost of the interest-free student loan scheme, then it should be really upfront\u2014I know that the Minister was upfront in his statement but it is not something that many people have picked up on\u2014because that will have an impact, particularly for those who are just near the threshold for making repayments. It is more significant for them than for somebody who is earning a significant amount of money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EAlthough we are talking about a fairly marginal amount of money, it will be more significant for someone on a very low income, right down there at that threshold level, than for someone earning a higher income. We need to be really clear and upfront about that, and I would certainly encourage the Government in future years to continue making those adjustments to the threshold and not to let this be seen as a precedent for future years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI can accept that it was probably a one-off for last year, but we would like to see that issue addressed in future years. I hope that when it is addressed this year there will be some retrospective nature of that to catch up with the fact that that threshold was not adjusted last year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI turn now to the interest-free loans for borrowers returning to New Zealand. I refer to clause 16, which inserts new section 38AM. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022 data-id=\u00225ebb2b2914124982adb7e0cdc6571f2f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ebb2b2914124982adb7e0cdc6571f2f\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour\u2014Wellington Central):\u003C/span\u003E I will pick up on the questions around the increased deduction rate, as well, and I also have another question for Mr Dunne in that regard. We have heard from the Green Party already in this debate about its concern over the notion that the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, and clauses 6 and 7 in particular, will allow the amount deducted from a borrower\u2019s salary and wages to be increased from 10c to 15c in the dollar, if the borrower fails to make deductions or has an overdue amount. Those on the Labour side of the Chamber can understand the motivation. New Zealand has an interest-free loan scheme, it is a good scheme, it is allowing people to pay their loans back a lot quicker than they previously have, and it is a scheme driven by the motivation of having people stay in New Zealand. We are extending that in this bill to other countries in the Realm of New Zealand, and that is good, so that people will contribute to the New Zealand economy. The bill has two purposes, and we understand that those purposes are important. The change in it, in fact, backs up the notion that it is important to stay in New Zealand and that we will create those incentives to do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EI note that clauses 6 and 7 will give the Commissioner of Inland Revenue the right to make judgment calls, and that is what my colleague Mr Hipkins was speaking about before. Those judgments will be very important and significant calls for some people. I have had a particular case in my electorate office this year of a couple who went to the UK and did not make repayments while they were away overseas. They came back to New Zealand and, for a variety of reasons, had some issues with making further repayments. In some senses this change would offer them a path for how repayment could be made, so, in fact, there is a positive to this. But my question for the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Revenue, is around how this change will be promoted. One of the big issues we have had with this scheme is people simply being unaware of what was required of them, particularly when they went overseas. A number of people would ring up electorate offices, and when I worked for the New Zealand University Students Association many years ago, they would ring up; they were simply unaware of what the requirement was when they were overseas. Initially, the scheme required people to pay back $1,000 a year or one-fifteenth of their income while they were away overseas, and people had difficulty making those kinds of adjustments and arrangements to their affairs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EMy question for the Minister really is, having understood the logic of giving the Commissioner of Inland Revenue the right to make these increases in the deduction rate, what will be done to ensure that people are aware of that, that they understand what their obligations are, and that they understand perhaps something of the criteria for how the commissioner will make those judgments? I think it is very important because already we see that there is an ability to reduce the payment if it will cause serious financial hardship, and that is good. That is an important caveat to put on this, but we do not want ourselves in a situation where we have a large number of people going overseas unaware that they could face increases in the deduction rate if they do not meet their obligations at the other end of the scheme. I look forward to the Minister taking a call on that and giving us some further information. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EAnother of the technical amendments that I want to draw some attention to is the hardship relief provided for in clauses 19, 20, 21, and 22. This is something where the Government deserves to be congratulated. We have seen a number of situations in which people find it very difficult, and, ironically, regarding the same couple who came to see me, this could have been a legitimate area where they could benefit because the issues and problems they had with their income were not happening in the immediate year when they were seeking relief. The hardship relief clauses are an important amendment to the scheme because we should not fool ourselves that the student loans scheme is a complete panacea when it comes to supporting students through their study. The student loans scheme puts a very serious obligation on those people who borrow from it. They have to pay back the loan from their salary at 10c in every dollar, and if they do not meet their repayments after this bill is passed it will be up to 15c in the dollar for some people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EThat repayment is a serious obligation and it brings me back to a comment I made in the second reading when Steven Joyce said that the Government would be looking at different aspects of the scheme and that it needs to tighten up some of the rules. He made the comment that this loan was unlike others because it did not have an incentive to pay it back. Well, the incentive is the 10c in the dollar. The hardship provisions in this bill, which effectively loosen those hardship provisions, are a very important response to the fact that 10c in every dollar over $19,000 earned has to be paid back. I think $19,000 is a very small amount of money to be earning before paying back the loan, so the hardship provisions provide an ability to make the student loans scheme a lot fairer. As I said, the Government deserves to be congratulated because it has brought this up, but we need to ensure we do not underestimate the importance of some people having access to those hardship provisions because for people earning $19,000 it will be difficult to make repayments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022 data-id=\u00228cf592f12670406191e0e3c7044d539d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228cf592f12670406191e0e3c7044d539d\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Mr Chair, I hope the reason you have given me the call last out of the Labour members who were seeking it is not that the Hawke\u2019s Bay Magpies have beaten the Southland Stags the last two times they played. But I would not make any such assertions, and I do not propose to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI have a question for the Minister of Revenue. He mentioned that the estimate of student loans on the book is about $10 billion. It would be interesting to know whether there is any qualitative or even quantitative research on the opportunity costs to society of not introducing interest-free student loans or student loans, at all. I suspect that the value to our society, our communities, and our economy is a lot higher than $10 billion. I am not suggesting that the Minister said it was not, but it would be interesting to know whether there is any study around that value. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI will talk about a couple of the clauses in the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. Clauses 10(2) to 10(5), 13, and 25(2) cover interest-free student loans for residents from realm countries. This bill introduces an exemption for borrowers in realm countries from the requirement that they be present in New Zealand in order to qualify for an interest-free loan. The Minister talked about this exemption a little earlier but I think we glossed over it a little. The reason I think this exemption is so great and aspirational is that potential students do not have to make a commitment to first of all come to New Zealand before they can qualify for a student loan. It is one of the reasons why I am a little disappointed that the Greens are not supporting this bill. I understand the Green Party\u2019s opposition to student loans from a philosophical perspective, but within the legislative framework in which we currently work I think this bill moves us forward quite a long way, and it would be good if the Greens could view it from within that legislative framework and support this bill for those reasons. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis change reflects a special relationship that has been talked about that realm countries\u2014I like the words \u201Crealm countries\u201D; I thought they were quite outdated, but let us keep them in there\u2014have with New Zealand, and aims to encourage borrowers who want to remain and make a contribution to those countries to do so. We have talked about the costs and benefits of globalisation, but I think nothing is more important than empowering communities, certainly within the realm countries mentioned here. If students can go back and contribute to their communities in a way that their education allows, it can only be good for their communities and their countries, let alone their own professional development. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThe key feature of this amendment relates to section 38AE of the Student Loan Scheme Act 1992. As mentioned, it is being amended to allow further exemption to the requirement that borrowers reside in New Zealand. It means that borrowers will qualify for the interest-free loan if they are present in a realm country\u2014Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, or the Ross Dependency\u2014for 183 days or more. There is a little bit of a catch\u2014well, not a catch. The purpose of the amendment is to encourage those who want to live in and make a contribution to these countries to do so, which is very important. Their student loans will be interest-free, as if they are still living and working in New Zealand. My colleague Kelvin Davis said he was of an era where he did not have a student loan, so it is hard to imagine. I caught the very end of student loans with interest, and when I bought my first house the interest rate on my mortgage was lower than the interest rate on my student loan, so I just tacked it on to the end of the mortgage. Thank goodness those days are over. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI will talk about something else as well. The bill introduces an extension of the interest-free loan entitlement to students engaged in full-time study overseas under a formal exchange programme approved by the New Zealand Government, or a formal agreement between a New Zealand education provider and an overseas tertiary education provider. It corrects an oversight in earlier legislation that disadvantaged certain borrowers studying overseas. Again, this amendment brings us back to where we see ourselves in the world, the whole area of globalisation, and importing talents and skills back to this country. In the past\u2014and there are members of this Committee who have done this\u2014students went overseas to study and felt that their real place in society was overseas, marketing their skills in different areas. This amendment allows them to come back and contribute to society in a meaningful way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003ELet us look at a bit of background on this amendment. Provisions in effect from 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2007 entitled borrowers who were resident in New Zealand for income tax purposes to a full interest write-off if they were engaged in full-time, full-year study. Part-time or part-year students could also qualify if their income was below a certain level. The student\u2019s New Zealand tertiary education provider was required to confirm the level of study. As this had the same effect as allowing a loan to be interest-free, when the extension of the exemption to undergraduate study was made, it was considered that these provisions were redundant and they were repealed. There is therefore a gap in interest-free loans for some students who are or were studying overseas.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022 data-id=\u002241f0375c1af74d5f8ca9a0cf6c3f255b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002241f0375c1af74d5f8ca9a0cf6c3f255b\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue):\u003C/span\u003E I will take just a brief call to respond to some of the questions that have been raised since my last intervention on the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. Mr Hipkins raised some questions about the repayment threshold, and the decision that was made late last year not to increase it for this year. There are a couple of things I would say in respect of that. Firstly, members will see that the bill introduces a much more transparent set of provisions for setting the interest rate that is to be payable where required, and that was because I felt that the previous system allowed for a bit of manipulation. This is a clearer and more transparent way of doing it. However, with regard to the determination of the income threshold, although the member might be able to make the same argument in practice, the reality is that some other factors also have to be taken into account. My recollection is that when the calculation was done last year as to what an increase might be, given other movements that had taken place it was very minimal. Although there was a cost of around $9.6 million, or something of that order, which I think the member quoted from my statement, the actual benefit per person was, from memory, something in the order of a few cents per week. On that point, given the economic circumstances and the practicality, we decided not to proceed. We will have to go through the same calculation at the end of this year, and obviously take this year\u2019s circumstances into account, in setting that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EMr Robertson raised a question regarding the hardship provisions, and also a general question with regard to keeping people informed of changes. I want to be absolutely clear about the hardship provisions. They take us back to where we were, prior to an unintended amendment a couple of years ago. The 15 percent rate issue, which the member also spoke about, will be applied only in circumstances where the borrowers are in New Zealand and are receiving wages and salaries. It will be taken on a case by case basis. This decision is not arbitrary; it is designed to deal with that situation when we are fairly certain that people are here but not paying what they should pay, and there will be the capacity for the commissioner to draw attention to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EAll of that leads me neatly to the next question that Mr Robertson raised, when he said that that was all very well, it was a good idea, and he supported it, etc., but then asked how people would be kept informed about it. I think that is a critical question. Over the last couple of years we have been tending to make much more use of interactive technologies to draw borrowers\u2019 attention to their responsibilities. I remind the member that when we did the work in 2007 to try to get a handle on how many overseas borrowers there were, we used popular websites like the New Zealand Herald website\u2014we put sidebar advertisements on it\u2014and, from memory, the Stuff website, because they are sites accessed by people overseas. A lot of that will continue. The usual work in drawing borrowers\u2019 attention to the new provisions at the time they become liable will also continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EAgain, I will just conclude with the comment I made in my first intervention. Once we change the whole system and the way in which it operates to become much more interactive over the next year or so, then a lot of these things will become much easier to resolve. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u0022cf0bd0a00925496683d33f210ae24f17\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cf0bd0a00925496683d33f210ae24f17\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to make a couple of comments and first of all thank the Minister of Revenue for his comments about spouses of diplomats, because that was something that has been discussed. I cannot remember whether we discussed it at the select committee itself or whether just the Labour members have been discussing it amongst ourselves. Certainly the Minister referred to keeping the issue under some sort of review. Amongst the agencies that have some interest here, the Inland Revenue Department, the Ministry of Education, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, it would be possible for that to slip through the cracks and I would urge the Minister that it not slip through the cracks. In fact, although it is possible under this legislation as it currently stands for a partner or spouse of a diplomat to qualify by virtue of being part of an approved tertiary institution course that is recognised for the purposes of this legislation, and in that way he or she could get in, it would be useful to clarify that tax status so that we know for sure whether such spouses and partners would be eligible. I think that is also of benefit when one thinks that these are people who work in the service of New Zealand, go offshore for a time, and inevitably come back, and if a partner or spouse can come back better skilled to contribute in his or her own right as well, then we should facilitate that. I thank the Minister for that consideration, and hope that it does not fall from view. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe other thing I want to talk about is something I had referred to earlier when I spoke about tertiary institutions turning away students at the moment, and I used the example of the Universal College of Learning. In fact it would appear that if the student demand continues as it is tracking at the moment at that college, where there have been 500 more students than last year apply for courses, which is something in the order of a 19 percent increase on its past roll, if that continues, then the chief executive officer of the college says they will have to close the doors some time between May and August. That is an issue that needs to be addressed by the Minister for Tertiary Education\u2014admittedly\u2014but again it underscores the point that this legislation is trying to make the student loan scheme accessible to more people at a time when the Government is not entertaining increasing student numbers, lifting caps, renegotiating them, or any other way of investing in the tertiary education system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThere is one particular exception, and it goes to the speech that my colleague Kelvin Davis made earlier. I refer to\u2014and the Chair will be pleased I am not going to seek to table it\u2014an article that was in the Christchurch Press over the weekend on Saturday, 20 February about the launch by Pita Sharples of a new guide for universities to support M\u0101ori students to succeed. Every indication we have had from the Prime Minister and the Minister for Tertiary Education to date has been that there will be closer examination of success and whether people will be able to continue to apply for and be eligible for student loans. Kelvin Davies and my colleague Carmel Sepuloni have expressed a concern from their own experience, and that of their own wh\u0101nau and whanaunga, for M\u0101ori and Pasifika students who come perhaps not from a background, in the majority of cases, that is accustomed to tertiary education. There is not an embedded understanding within the family of what it takes to support somebody to succeed, and therefore additional support from an institution is required.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u0022bed84519c56c4cfba177319607a0b96e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bed84519c56c4cfba177319607a0b96e\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002248404236d2b8466ebac91ed3c4a5be6f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000342\u0022\u003EPart 1 agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002237d042e22ca64561859389bb7aa1975d\u0022\u003EPart 2  Consequential amendments to, and revocations of, other enactments\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u002262c07108074a48759be7685f5be74bd6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002262c07108074a48759be7685f5be74bd6\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Part 2 of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill is technical in nature. The bill itself is technical in nature, but Part 2 simply draws other legislation into alignment through a series of consequential amendments. The consequential amendments or the revocation of certain parts of legislation are now referred to in Part 2 in order to make the whole set internally consistent. There are amendments to the Tax Administration Act, there are consequential revocations of enactments such as the Student Loan Scheme (Income Amount for Full Interest Write-off) Regulations 2005, and parts also from 2006 and 2009 are being revoked. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe need to keep the legislation consistent is important. It is imperative but it also raises for me the same question that I have referred to previously, and that is the extent to which the consistency reflected in Part 2 is the consistency reflected in the Government\u2019s approach to tertiary education. Previously when I spoke about this it was clear from some of the interjections opposite that Government members thought that this was simply Labour saying again: \u201CSpend, spend, spend and don\u2019t make any cuts anywhere.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EGovernment appropriations have always and ever been about the ordering of priorities. This party is saying that in order to be not only consistent but also progressive about tertiary education opportunities and the benefits that accrue to the country from giving more people access to tertiary education, those opportunities should not be lost sight of and should be made consistent across Government policy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe consistencies that are reflected by Part 2 come into question when the whole approach to tertiary education policy is looked at. We are not any longer in the days that we were in when I first went to Victoria University, some considerable time ago. I remember queuing to pay 10 percent of the course fees in the student union building at Victoria University. We have long since moved on from those days. I wish that our newest member of this House still had such a regime available to him, but that is no longer the case. Now it takes active investment on the part of the Government to ensure that tertiary education is available to all. My father gave me $100 and my mother bought me a coat to cope with the Wellington winter, and on the strength of those gifts and a bursary from high school, I went to Victoria University. I was able, on the strength of the facilities available at that time, to give my father back the $100 at the end of my first year, with some careful stewardship, I have to say, of the money that I did get. I did not emerge with a student loan. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003ETimes have changed, without a doubt, and I wish that things were easier for students now, but they are not. That is why it is incumbent upon the Government to actively invest in tertiary education opportunities. The consistency of approach to tertiary education should mirror the consistency that the Minister has achieved in Part 2. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00229d638d0196db4804ada7f5bfa4f923eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229d638d0196db4804ada7f5bfa4f923eb\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E This Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill is relatively uncontroversial. I was lucky to be a member of the Education and Science Committee that was dealing with it at the time, and I am pleased to be able to speak to Part 2. It is fair to say that, relatively speaking, Part 2 is the smaller part of this bill, but it includes consequential amendments and areas that people need to talk about. I acknowledge that although we did not always agree with the policy, and although some of the options that were put up were not picked up by the Government, the officials did a good job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003ESome regulations are being revoked as part of this legislation. I say to the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Revenue, that it is good to use primary legislation to revoke regulations, because it means that the provision is on the face of the legislation, rather than people having to dive away to other areas to work their way through the particular issues. Frankly, it is a bit sad that we need legislation for some of these things\u2014such as clause 29, \u201COfficers to maintain secrecy\u201D\u2014but we do. However, the change there is a very small consequential amendment, which omits \u201C, (2AA),\u201D from section 81(4)(g) of the Tax Administration Act. That is an effect of something else earlier on being revoked. It is fair to say that this legislation is in the tidy-up category of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI have some problems with my colleagues from the Green Party over this legislation. Even though we all have the policy intention of heading towards free tertiary education, the idea that those members would vote against consequential amendments in a relatively minor bill because they are opposed to people at university being charged fees I think goes beyond a stand on principle to a stance that is pretty hard to explain. I was slightly surprised at that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3ac2f076fc64434a6a23c9b372caf15\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: What sort of student were you?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc2723ccce164b448506ebc0be7002d3\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I was a student in the era slightly before that of my colleague Maryan Street, I think\u2014when I look at her\u2014but I was at the same institution. I was of the group that did not do a seventh form year\u2014or 6A, I think they called it. I went to university at that stage. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226abcd888c99d4b429265fe0c34bf1239\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re a child prodigy!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1d41c38fe9c4af19dba8fd13f45b9ce\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I was 16\u00BD; I was old enough. But as a result of my slightly better than mediocre work in my first year, I ended up getting a bursary in my second year. That was the way that it worked. I cannot remember the bursary being an enormous amount of money, but the fees\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231904ca1358646d9a29c1db6ec724ffc\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: A late developer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223f976c03c9d4fe88e317813411dfa30\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I was an early developer, actually. I ended up a year\u2019s extra study ahead of my colleagues who had stayed at school, we ended up with about the same bursary, and I had had a much better time than they had had over that period. But how much of that time was at the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228428d75271d4de092ddd5c99c04a371\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: Did you join the students association?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226339ec275254baa8ee057e60e50da45\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I think it was automatic at that stage. But I did \u201Ccafe honours\u201D, and it was good. Bob Moodie used to be there in his kaftan. Jim Baxter would be reciting poetry. I tell you what, Jim Baxter\u2019s poetry was nowhere near as interesting as this bill; there was some really interesting poetry, but none of it came close to Part 2 of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. He never came close. But I must say it was a particularly interesting time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u00228090f7fdcf9b43908c6ba50f5fc20652\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228090f7fdcf9b43908c6ba50f5fc20652\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I was really enjoying Trevor Mallard\u2019s contribution to the debate and I hoped that he would seek a second call, but he did not. Part 2 of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill is basically about consistency. There is really not very much to discuss with regard to what is in this part, so I will go back to some of the other things that we have discussed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EA few members have discussed the fact that they accessed student loans, and what that meant for them. We are seeing that student loans will perhaps be in jeopardy moving forward, with some of the public comments that have been made by members opposite, including the Prime Minister and also, unfortunately, the Minister for Tertiary Education. The newest member of Parliament, Gareth Hughes, pointed out the fact that he is another former student who is paying back his student loan. As I said earlier, I am nearly there. After 9 years of trying to pay back a student loan\u2014not after 9 years of a great Labour Government\u2014I have nearly finished paying it off. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EOne thing that has come up publicly again is the issue of students who do not necessarily finish their degrees, diplomas, or study on time, and the fact that this Government may be looking to making it difficult for them to access student loans for the full extent of their study. I point out something that I pointed out earlier, which is that unfortunately in this country M\u0101ori and Pacific people still take longer to complete their tertiary qualifications in terms of degrees and diplomas. That is not because of lesser intelligence\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022593299377ccc4a2e916e3a8090400283\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: Or greater beauty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253ba7fd7082746ae8057af7d1c9d9a7f\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and not because of greater beauty, as Charles Chauvel has pointed out, but because many M\u0101ori and Pacific students are still the first in their family to go to university or to do higher-level tertiary study, and it is a very, very strange experience for them. Many of our people are not accustomed to it, especially when other family members have not done it before, and that can result in a few failures in the first year or the second year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d9bed1a45502420487c01d57aeb98bc5\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022585dbd08772a46a2baa243ce7ddb5d7e\u0022\u003EQuestions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c8d3595b9cc64febb2e29cb61f34ee35\u0022\u003EEconomy\u2014Benefits of Rebalancing\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002219bcf2ff-a193-4361-9072-813a4e36683c\u0022 data-id=\u00222e90da5f827544d5b45996c43e2fc93e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219bcf2ff-a193-4361-9072-813a4e36683c\u0022\u003E1. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222e90da5f827544d5b45996c43e2fc93e\u0022\u003EPESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National\u2014Maungakiekie)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: Why is the Government intent on rebalancing the economy, and what benefits will that bring?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u00223008e59efe744f7f9175d59292c69c8a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223008e59efe744f7f9175d59292c69c8a\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E The Government needs to work on pushing our resources back to where New Zealand has a competitive advantage. This is a big job. Our tradable sector has been in a 5-year recession, during which its output has declined by 10 percent. By contrast the non-tradable side of the economy has grown by 12 percent, but we do need to reorient it in order to create sustainable jobs and higher incomes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219bcf2ff-a193-4361-9072-813a4e36683c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f697089a743486eb4e62dd292b76e1b\u0022\u003EPeseta Sam Lotu-Iiga\u003C/span\u003E: Which sectors have performed the best and the worst over the past 5 years?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220732868fb96d478e97d8c33c17892aa2\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The major weaknesses have been concentrated in services and manufacturing. Exports of services have fallen by 18 percent in real terms since 2004, and every category of manufacturing has shown a similar decline. This includes major areas such as food processing, which is a core part of our economy. In fact, the overall output of the tradable industries has now not increased since 2002. By far the strongest sector of the economy has been Government administration, which has grown by 29 percent in real terms since 2004. Clearly this divergence cannot continue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219bcf2ff-a193-4361-9072-813a4e36683c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292cf0319a4fa42a9b6a12f4f775c0791\u0022\u003EPeseta Sam Lotu-Iiga\u003C/span\u003E: What impact on New Zealanders has this unbalanced economic performance produced?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff2fbbdf40464f10a205123156e37db2\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: An unbalanced economy tends to hold growth back. That is why this economy grew by less than 1 percent per year in the 3 years before the global crisis arrived. This is a big drain on the potential for higher incomes in New Zealand. Had the economy grown at its normal rate over the past 5 years, the average household income would now be $5,000 per year higher after tax than it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232880c2880f9439a9522728edd131e63\u0022\u003EHon Sir Roger Douglas\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister agree that any rebalancing must focus on private sector job creation; if so, can he explain to the House how it makes sense to prohibit young people from accepting a job at the rate of $10 per hour, or $400 per week, and in the process force them on to the unemployment benefit, where they receive about $3 per hour, or $120 per week, without contributing anything to society?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229685546153d74d4e8b1c8bf9a4012b92\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The Government shares that member\u2019s concern about the high number of young people who are unemployed. We will have the opportunity to discuss his solution as he brings his bill, the Minimum Wage (Mitigation of Youth Unemployment) Amendment Bill, to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219bcf2ff-a193-4361-9072-813a4e36683c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfcaa1360ac944cab2a2ed8b9250cbe5\u0022\u003EPeseta Sam Lotu-Iiga\u003C/span\u003E: What steps is the Government taking to rebalance the economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229db9c2d8629439990eb728df81beb19\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The range of measures that are in place was outlined in the Prime Minister\u2019s statement to the House a few weeks ago. Currently we are considering the advice from the Tax Working Group, which advises on ensuring there is more uniform taxation of all sectors, including property, and on switching from our reliance on consumption and income taxes. We believe this could give New Zealanders better incentives to work, save, invest, and reduce their tendency to consume more than they earn by borrowing to make up the difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002281ab04cb58a044f69606afc3b625a5b9\u0022\u003ESocial Development and Employment Programmes\u2014Reports\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022 data-id=\u0022736fa47935724da78f74db229d895a8f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E2. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022736fa47935724da78f74db229d895a8f\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What reports, if any, has she received on programmes she has put in place since she became Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022 data-id=\u002225ba3de84fa644b9a7db3d65db64a23b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002225ba3de84fa644b9a7db3d65db64a23b\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment):\u003C/span\u003E I have received a number of reports that show that the programmes put in place since National came into Government have been achieving well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022beb111e71cc34363afbc0fb4b4c0eb73\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Does she agree with the Hon John Key, who said that New Zealand needs fewer politically correct programmes like listening to music, and we need closer alignment between our economic needs and Government-supported programmes to ensure people flow into trades and apprenticeships; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b17742ca33864698a8db20b33bdebe2b\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: I certainly agree with the Prime Minister, particularly when he talks about the need for us to create real jobs for young people and for New Zealanders out there. It is about a bigger programme than just one particular need. It is about real jobs. It is about giving businesses confidence so that they can invest and employ more people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c6cebff5df54cd28284e9da37a13d04\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Does she agree with the Hon Bill English, who said that it was a nonsense to spend money on dodgy community programmes when the economy is suffering from a lack of skilled workers; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b6f9491032849c0b7939bf8c97cad59\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: I certainly agree with the Minister of Finance when he talks about how we need to assist those young people at this time with some Government initiatives. It is about the right investment. It is about infrastructure programmes. It is about the Government putting the money where it needs to be, so that businesses have that confidence to grow more real jobs for our young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a744a9a7-a2e8-401b-abfb-aec22a3818c8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002271a338a1bc6f42db93ece1f8530f7078\u0022\u003EKatrina Shanks\u003C/span\u003E: Can she give us example of how the Government is working hard to ensure the success of its programmes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf6ebbc448f44353a357c99a6ce3571c\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: The Government is taking a long hard look at the way we contract with the non-governmental organisation sector and the relationships that we have with communities. We are not just pointing at providers and saying that they have to change. We are saying that if we want different outcomes, we have to do things differently. We have to change the way we contract, which is why I am delighted that more high-trust contracts with non-governmental organisations are about to be signed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4f28f446d0c4033bdc523620a87a2c0\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Are the criteria for Community Max still to support the completion of projects that benefit the community or the environment, creating jobs for young people and providing an opportunity for them to build skills and work experience while contributing to the community; if not, what are the criteria?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231f2d6c948b344a8ad4af58d8e999ab9\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, that is part of the criteria. But I want to be quite clear that this Government is not over-prescriptive. We are backing communities to get on with it and do what is best for them within their communities. I must admit that when designing this programme, we did not take the control freak approach that we have certainly seen in the past. We trust those we contract with to get on with the delivery and do what is best for their communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223abe9969ae9f415da8ab44bc75740b60\u0022\u003EHone Harawira\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen the many enthusiastic reports showing how Community Max participants are now confident, knowledgable, and skilled enough to begin employment or training? What incentives are being developed to create supported training, work options, and jobs to build on this success?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b3508caac74454eb33e8ebc1f2e265f\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I have seen many reports of positive outcomes from Community Max. I know that the member himself has certainly approached me many times with good-news stories of how it is working in his community to keep young people on. The follow-up is most important. We need to make sure that we are addressing long-term real jobs at the end of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c0079b7b84c4781bd21815fb90ef76c\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Does the use of Community Max funding\u2014which by one provider\u2019s own admission is a recruitment tool for a rugby league team paying 18 young men for 30 hours a week to have an opportunity in their sport, with no literacy, numeracy, or particular skill or training provided\u2014meet the Community Max criteria or the promise of the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance to get rid of dodgy politically correct programmes; if so\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f75e8643f0a4c01aa0861c9513d1c01\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I ask members to show some courtesy. There is a structured question being asked and the House should hear it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223d1e74999a34c0eb29ad1c5e069df07\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: For such a programme to exist under her watch, will she tender her resignation for failing to meet the high standards that the Prime Minister has set for his Ministers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a111d0b0f9d84f5bb35bfe39c0fcb6d1\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: I am not aware of the particular programme that the member is talking about. But I will say that the previous Government was so controlling\u2014it had to be only its way; it had to tick certain boxes\u2014that it did not support young people to be engaged and have real\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ac1425502a149e6bdda82dcfc33dc70\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the Minister, but on this occasion I ask the Opposition to show a little respect. A question has been asked, in fact, by the Opposition. Even if Opposition members are not interested in hearing the answer, I am. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ccab8f78ba37433189513aafd45e7bec\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: As far as Community Max is concerned, we have put it back to the communities to look at what is best for them in their environment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f6d8ac2d9754b49b542652ec5ee8bf7\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Blame them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a81df49f79848b58efbb3f20f4ee1a0\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: I am not blaming them at all. I think they are doing a fantastic job. That is certainly the difference between us and Labour. The communities are stepping up and finding real opportunities for their young people. One way to engage them is through sporting activities. So, I will back them. There will be the odd time that we need to go back and check on some things, but I reckon they are doing a fantastic job and it is working well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223f7760166054a1d874b99dff07f8059\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Is accountability for the expenditure of taxpayers\u2019 money an important part of this Government\u2019s programme?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a488e8a44fce4e3ea9f5a318a630d4d3\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it certainly is. Amusingly enough, just last week the criticism from Labour in this House was that we were not extending Community Max. It wanted to see more programmes, and now says there are bad things. It is bit like any policy we have seen from the other side, it is sort of up and down and all around and not really well structured.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbb25f6e86414bde92eef4096343635d\u0022\u003EHone Harawira\u003C/span\u003E: What assurance can she give the House that the Community Max programme, which has been very successful in, and warmly welcomed by, rural M\u0101ori communities right throughout the country, will be sustained beyond the next financial year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d66af66a7fc3492f87d6ee339e70632b\u0022\u003EHon PAULA BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: We are pleased how the programme has developed. It has always been time limited, it was always a recessionary measure, and Cabinet did put a major investment in that, but there have been no obligations for that since then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222627a4fda8b84fc39e31861ae6e91fdb\u0022\u003ERadio New Zealand\u2014Funding\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u00222201f5d14e634e70826a2b170262e76d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E3. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222201f5d14e634e70826a2b170262e76d\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Broadcasting: Has he told Radio New Zealand that its funding will be frozen for a number of years; if so, how many?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u0022933f2e487757473083c4cfa881618485\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022933f2e487757473083c4cfa881618485\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister for Building and Construction)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister of Broadcasting: The Minister has made it clear to the Radio New Zealand board that, like a number of other Government agencies, Radio New Zealand must live within its current baselines. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb49ee66-7ca7-472d-a4a1-b099fd594dfa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fff16478d2e4ded8c9c838c2d688e95\u0022\u003EDr Russel Norman\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister has had this question for some time. It is a pretty straightforward question: have the funds been frozen; if so, for how long? There was no attempt to address either part of the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225aaef930836a4d56b1618a36028da0fd\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I appreciate the point the member is making, because the question is on notice and it does ask \u201Cif so, how many\u201D years. I ask the Minister to respond, because the answer could be interpreted as meaning indefinitely. I ask the Minister to respond to that part of the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241b4b0e09e2d403c8f49f2d852aabbff\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: As many members of this House will know, funding changes year by year. However, for the foreseeable 2 to 3-year baseline out-years, Radio New Zealand has been asked to live within that baseline.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b565780f01a845b3b8a320c4f898de0e\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Why is he ignoring the advice of the board and chief executive of Radio New Zealand that current funding levels are already unsustainable, and that any freeze in funding will undermine the quality and standards of Radio New Zealand and its charter?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c92d770bccc3489eb87fda17d3ec750a\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: It is quite the opposite. I quote from a letter to Dr Coleman from Christine Grice, the chairman, dated 21 January\u2014that is, just last month\u2014in which Ms Grice says: \u201CThe board is satisfied that the funding gap will be bridged to meet the requirements you laid out at our December meeting as being the bottom-line requirements to enable Radio New Zealand to manage within the present funding over the next 2 to 3 years while meeting its statutory and charter obligations on a sustainable basis, and be ready for this implementation on 31 March.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224bab62fa2f57497f962d2b2e40369edb\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister know, through the radio ratings, how many people listen to Radio New Zealand, or is he, like the rest of the New Zealand taxpayers who fund it, kept in the dark about listener numbers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d75787bba9eb43b1ba9451d8ef3ad085\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: I do not have those ratings, but I think they are very well publicised. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffb0e9fe7b144f679defd009e962062a\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Is not a freeze in baseline funding really a cut when other costs for rent, transmission, power, and so forth are all going up?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281cacd826f5847d681f1b6218b7d96c0\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is not. Many Government organisations find a number of various ways in which they can make savings\u2014savings they should have been making over many years. Those savings can allow for at least the same, if not an even better, product to be delivered over time within those baselines. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b806b458fdf4bbeb6513d46ff003cad\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Why did the Minister give the Radio New Zealand board an ultimatum to change its mindset and adopt a more commercial approach, or else, in his letter to the chair of the Radio New Zealand board on 2 February?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4955f07d3cc46aaa408ee0e40eb8c27\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister has not given any clear direction to Radio New Zealand about what it must do to achieve the goal. All he has asked it to do is to make sure it can work within its baselines, and to reply to him in detail about how it will achieve it. So all the rumour-mongering and scare-mongering that the Minister has directed Radio New Zealand to cut FM or to start getting sponsorship is not correct. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b73d83b8e2584cef98c3aeef3c26089e\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: What did he mean, then, when he demanded that the board change its mindset and look at alternative revenue models\u2014in other words, adopt a more commercial approach\u2014when Radio New Zealand\u2019s legislation says explicitly that it must be free of advertising and sponsorship, and must remain commercial-free?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e10ccf389e3e422d915fdb2271ac6b9c\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: I am quite perplexed as to why the questioning carries on, given that I have read a letter from the chair of Radio New Zealand, who says that Radio New Zealand can deliver all its statutory and charter obligations from within the current baselines. I am really not sure what the member is on about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235483ed24c344b08ab63416288dbee1d\u0022\u003EClare Curran\u003C/span\u003E: What level of cuts in programming at Radio New Zealand is he prepared to accept?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbf41c9131394132b3dafc4b3ed5aaad\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: Again, I refer the member to the statements the Minister has made. He wants Radio New Zealand to look at its service and its delivery, and to look at how it can make changes, as so many other Government departments and agencies have been asked to do, to find out areas that can be made more efficient, that can deliver things better and more cost-effectively, but without reducing its ability to deliver both its statutory and its charter obligations. I would have thought Labour would think that was an absolutely perfectly natural thing to do with any Government agency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224eba8381f39440b4a94c25d804bb1c29\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree that some of the options for cost savings that Radio New Zealand has been forced to consider, such as reducing its regional news coverage, will undermine the quality of Radio New Zealand programmes and its charter?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb90de4e85c24a1194790f5fe74b0214\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: Once again, I am quite gobsmacked. Radio New Zealand has not been forced to consider anything. It has been asked to come back with a plan about how it will deliver the requirements under the Act and the charter within its baselines. It will make the decision about what changes it makes to its operations; it is not being directed to do any specific thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f83c773ddf614ef3bb9fc9f96ed7678f\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Has he discussed Radio New Zealand\u2019s funding with any chief executives from private sector radio, such as the former MediaWorks chief executive, Brent Impey, who campaigned last year for cuts to Radio New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c0df793e284746fa9fb12765922d35f9\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: Because I am answering on behalf of the Minister, it would be impossible for me to answer that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002206b472242c6f49349a90f93219ae444b\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 8 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002266f36bfb5df14e9597420736c2fcf956\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002266f36bfb5df14e9597420736c2fcf956\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E In order to assist the Minister of Education with her answer to question No. 8, I seek leave to table an email invitation to Andrew Oh of the board of trustees of the now abolished Aorangi School, inviting him to a \u201Cweb-inar\u201D to be held on 8 March.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222be86079b4834d6aad2bdfdc6327b307\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This is an invitation to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e851417f0e84ae38f243e97ad9bf016\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: This is an invitation to someone who has been tossed off the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d59af4133024dcfb52f52144d166abb\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The source of this document is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213cb4b44455a4372bfdba819a6cf58d8\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Andrew Oh. It is an email that was sent to him on her behalf.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6de13e281fe4d60ad0d34b9ebc7c7f5\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Can we have more explanation? Mrs Tolley\u2019s email to this guy is being tabled by Trevor?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ce7e9e0d7e9451bb3c170060c036d96\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If the member wants to raise a point of order he is more than welcome to do so, if he wants clarification. I see that the House is confused. Could the member clarify exactly what this document is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c66819bdd8504e0cb7f4eafec0001daf\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: It was sent on behalf of the Minister, it is about one of the ministerial-approved training sessions, and it is to Andrew Oh, who used to be a member of the board of trustees at Aorangi School. She is sending it to a trustee of an abolished school.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022886cde030561465485cbe0d501d8c079\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Is the member saying this document was sent by the Ministry of Education?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea93e928931241b9a3907c7425abbdf7\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022971c93c1b7b6479da8cc71d12805ee3e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document from the Ministry of Education. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022644ee922341b499f9a5f8ffdbf6b782e\u0022\u003EFinance, Minister\u2014Statements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022 data-id=\u0022984fdf861a40497b9b03433b16869b04\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E4. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022984fdf861a40497b9b03433b16869b04\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour\u2014New Lynn)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all his recent statements?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u0022b2d7ee4bba77496183218c283fb1537c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b2d7ee4bba77496183218c283fb1537c\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, particularly those statements in respect of the weak performance of the New Zealand economy in the last term of the previous Labour Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227686c9ed538a493abaac409f613ff9d8\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Which statement is correct: his claim to this House recently that over the past 10 years the New Zealand economy performed very poorly, or the statement he made 5 minutes later to the House that over the past 10 years the economy grew significantly?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215a3eeaabf814b1a9b0f804046b1b187\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I would not necessarily take that member\u2019s representations of my statements at face value. But I can understand why he is sensitive about the fact that New Zealand\u2019s economy grew poorly under his management, at a time when the rest of the world was growing strongly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022118b6772f2ea4ee889bae4fbdc46c25b\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My colleague David Cunliffe put to the Minister a question containing two quotes from the Minister\u2014the person of whom he is actually asking the question. So far, all the answers have been about David Cunliffe, and not Bill English. I do not think it is fair for the Minister to get up and say he understands why the member is sensitive or embarrassed or whatever it might be. He should just answer the question. [Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db3158aed1034506a96f211fc077e386\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: There should not be interjections\u2014[Interruption] I am on my feet now. What is more, points of order should be heard in silence. I expect that. I think the difficulty with the question as asked is that the Minister clearly, as he started his answer, disputed the context of the components of the member\u2019s question. As the question is not a question on notice, there has been no authentication of the validity of the context of the two quotes, and that is why I cannot insist on a particular answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022663a711d33164f73a040bd38dc852f1d\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. If the difficulty was in the way that the question was phrased, may I seek leave to rephrase that question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9c2f632cf6c4e4289bab0855b0ed6e5\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No. The member asked his question and got an answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fbe3f87c-849c-4eee-84cc-119edeb1a681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc3c5b8afe214aa580f766719873b33a\u0022\u003EAaron Gilmore\u003C/span\u003E: What statements has the Minister made about the Government\u2019s economic priorities for 2010?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236fcdf06064a4109b74da184c865af1b\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The statements I have made about the economy looking ahead are focused on the need to rebalance the economy and on the Government\u2019s programme for doing so. We simply cannot continue to be a country that spends more than it earns and tries to create wealth by people buying and selling houses off each other.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223fb9233781f54e0fb17fec9eb15e4bcc\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: How does he reconcile his statement that between 2005 and 2008 \u201Cthis economy grew by less than 1 percent per year\u201D with official statistics that show that the economy grew at almost twice the rate he has claimed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022130691e9efa04ebea9e1f37996f5cd39\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member is retelling a story from a couple of weeks ago on one of those left-wing blogs, and the problem there is that he is using nominal growth in the economy, when the standard measure is real growth in the economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b5f2326fd6140dc81797a823df3013c\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that during the last year of National\u2019s administration, from September to September, GDP actually declined by 2.2 percent?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295e37179e26a490488fae34c2cb6c578\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I can confirm that, and I am pleased that the member has discovered that. But this Government is dealing with the economy as it found it, and the fact is that from about 2005 onwards the Government sector grew strongly and our earning capacity shrank. We then had a global crisis, and it is our job to clean up that mess.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022caf30b5f332449249ad3bd1dc465c1b9\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister aware that over the 9 years of the Labour Government GDP growth averaged 3.2 percent, which is higher than under the previous National Government and obviously his own; and is he further aware that that strong and sustained expansion was achieved at the same time that net debt was cut to zero, gross debt was cut in half, unemployment was less than half the current rate, thousands of New Zealanders were lifted out of poverty, and the minimum and average wages rose every year; if so, why does he not just admit to New Zealanders what is patently obvious: that he is shonky in his use of figures, and he has no plan for growth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002251844d2e3da941d7af0a6c27f6657129\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I think that shows why Labour got into Opposition and is staying in Opposition. Labour is unable to understand the negative impact that it had on this country and on the thousands of people who have no jobs or little job security because of the poor economic management in the last years of the previous Labour Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e5937808fe624e44bd19372a9752e1d0\u0022\u003EPrisons\u2014Steps to Reduce Risks to Staff\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u00228d18b0ca11a54dc5b2a8c926ac99b8e7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E5. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228d18b0ca11a54dc5b2a8c926ac99b8e7\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Corrections: What steps are being taken to reduce the risk of assaults on prison staff?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u00223866e9db9e534c7189a33f0989e357fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223866e9db9e534c7189a33f0989e357fc\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections):\u003C/span\u003E This Government is serious about reducing the risk faced by front-line staff. Corrections officers are managing some of the most difficult and dangerous individuals in our country. I am pleased to report that the Department of Corrections is currently providing all of its 3,000 prison staff with tactical communication training and de-escalation training. It has already trained more than a third of its staff. Staff have provided examples of situations where, as a result of this training, highly tense situations have been safely defused.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022329e704181c9432b867530e10ca32b1a\u0022\u003EDr Cam Calder\u003C/span\u003E: What else is she doing to ensure that prison staff are safe at work?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222057f81b5f01421ba5fc27d66615d26e\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: Tomorrow at Spring Hill Corrections Facility I will officially launch the roll-out of stab-resistant body armour, spit hoods, and batons. The department will also begin a 12-month trial of pepper spray. This equipment will help prison staff to manage hostile situations. The spit hoods will protect staff from saliva and blood, and the batons will be used by specially trained staff as a last resort. The last administration had 9 years to make prison staff safer and did nothing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228d27f15f7f424e19810745c2ab1eee08\u0022\u003EHealth Services\u2014Access\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u00226345f43410c945c7a0fbcb37b2741a46\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E6. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226345f43410c945c7a0fbcb37b2741a46\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Health: Can he guarantee New Zealanders will not have reduced access to health services this year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u0022c0552f1272e4478db4a6d2d42fd230bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c0552f1272e4478db4a6d2d42fd230bc\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E There is more money in Vote Health than under the previous Government and there are more front-line services being delivered overall.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247bab95c856b4ec8980c673b7c14b58c\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he give Parliament contradictory answers when I asked him about assessments: first, saying that everyone would be assessed, and then, later in an answer to the same question, saying that everyone who wants an assessment would get one; and how do those comments line up against the announcement from the Otago and Southland district health boards that there will be no assessment for any client receiving 1 or 1\u00BD hours of home support a week, and that they will just have that home help cut?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ff9d986d7a8486eaf995f6a1e9c57ea\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: With regard to the later point, the Otago District Health Board has made it clear that all those people will be offered an assessment, and if they seek an assessment, their hours will be maintained.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1017272b9a045369c4039311637a1f7\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: When he made the offer on Tuesday to personally intervene in any individual case of home support cuts, did he know that his ministerial colleague\u2019s office in Southland had told a 76-year-old woman with leukaemia that the cuts to her home support were \u201Cnothing to do with the Government\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f414547836544d88bebd605bebfee260\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I would be unable to confirm the veracity of the member\u2019s claim, but I tell the member that if she has any constituent cases of people being unable to stay in their homes or of their not being safe, then those cases should be brought to our attention, and we will take action.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225d21a1611ac493d9d387b3afbd0c14d\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. In the introductory comments to his answer, the Minister implied that what I was saying was untrue. That is unparliamentary\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227842b59b807c43809206bd3963fdc53e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member to resume her seat. I do not think the Minister said that. He said he could not establish the veracity of the information contained in the question. I think that that is not accusing the member of anything\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bcb23696be1340bc8b184adb65e557cc\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Very close.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022033f78a8ff6b43c4aa799bfa66fec5ca\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member is doubting it, and that is fair enough, but the Minister is not accusing the member of saying anything false, at all. I think it would be incorrect to interpret it that way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278be1613ddd64fd984882f85aeddf1b7\u0022\u003EDr Paul Hutchison\u003C/span\u003E: Why are the Otago and Southland district health boards having to review services being provided to their communities?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f4cc6c4062b476b8edb80a727cc69a7\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: We have inherited significant clinical and financial problems in the Otago and Southland district health boards. These issues have been longstanding and unresolved, creating much uncertainty for local people and staff. These pressures are a large part of why locally they have come to the conclusion that the two boards should come together. This financial year the National-led Government increased funding for Otago-Southland by $28 million, which goes only some way to dealing with the $20 million of unfunded services we have inherited. We are endeavouring to fill this gap steadily over some years, which is essential to securing the future of local health services for the people of Otago-Southland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce74bfc14a0544808f2129cebf273dc2\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I apologise for being one supplementary question behind, because I wanted to remind myself of my old Latin and the word \u201Cveracity\u201D. The definition, as I think it is, goes to truthfulness and honesty. The Minister used that word in relation to the information supplied by the Hon Ruth Dyson. If the Minister had said it was factually incorrect, wrong, or inaccurate, that would be fine. But doubting someone\u2019s truthfulness or honesty is something that this House has not allowed in the past.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222223774854274c028035925e6f5a00d9\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am not going to go back to this particular issue. Although I accept the member has looked up the meaning of \u201Cveracity\u201D in the Collins English Dictionary\u2014I totally accept that\u2014I think in common usage today it does not mean to imply that someone is intentionally not telling the truth. I think the Minister was questioning the facts that were put in front of the House. As it is a supplementary question, we cannot validate the facts. Ministers are entitled to disagree with the facts. They do need to be careful how they do that, but I do not believe that questioning the veracity of the facts is in any way implying that the member was being in any way untruthful at all. I do not think we should get too pedantic in ruling out too many things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b4c8a34a19e4836b942b5f4f0326669\u0022\u003EChester Borrows\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table correspondence between myself and the then Minister for Disability Issues relating to an incident on 4 September 2007 when 300 people had their home care cut in Wanganui City, followed the following year by a similar number.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225564ab7a95e2448a9cc4c7a549a9c4d7\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that document to be tabled. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229464fffea66045eea913720a2a2d6975\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: What will happen to older people in Southland who not only are facing these cuts to their home support but have now been told by the district health board that it will cut the number of people entering rest homes by 1,000?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cabc9d99d6954f9fa2f3b66191d733b7\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I have rung the chief executive of the district health board. We can tell the member that, as I have said earlier, if there is any evidence that someone is going to be unsafe in his or her home or will be unable to stay in his or her home as a result of the changes to home care, then those matters will be taken up. We are dealing with a legacy of neglect with the Otago and Southland district health boards. The previous Government left them with over $20 million of unfunded services, and we are dealing with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270868b93704845578c640e23162676f9\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister continued to address the issue of home care in his answer when, in fact, the question was on the number of people entering rest homes. I wonder whether the Minister did not realise that we had moved on to rest homes. Could he then attempt to answer the question about how many cuts to people entering rest homes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a87818a9dffb4747a2b6b832f18514f9\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I must confess the member has caught me there; I did not pick that up. The question was the question of the Hon Ruth Dyson, was it not? Does the member feel that her question was not answered at all?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8af131971d54ab3bc92c35d5a95bce6\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Consistently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfe94d7c45c74a1d9d0dd1e0bc4b917d\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Silly me, I guess, in asking such a question. Given that such a question has arisen under a point of order, I will invite the member to repeat her question so long as she does repeat the question she asked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9b26fc7a42541598ec9d5bdc5db4ea1\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: What will happen to older people in Southland who not only face these cuts but have now been told by the district health board that it will cut the number of people entering rest homes by 1,000?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfba469d33014dbb85d5c9153a885dca\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: What will happen to these people in Southland is that they will realise that those people who are seeking rest home care will still get the assessments that the member is worried about. But what Mrs Dyson needs to realise is that the Government has inherited a very difficult situation at Otago-Southland, which has created a lot of uncertainty for staff, and we are endeavouring to deal with the $20 million of unfunded services that we inherited from the previous Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242beceff37154ba091c3095c3f194e9d\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table comments from Mr Peter Harding, an 81-year-old Invercargill man, who has agreed for his name and feelings to be made known publicly, who says\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5948793fb7b45ea9f103d810800de36\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Before the member goes through what has been said, can I establish the source of the document, because leave is being sought to table a document.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022624d0f59b2454717ba41ae85912dab20\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: It is Mr Peter Harding, an 81-year-old Invercargill man, as reported in the Southland Times yesterday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022222514963b8d442d8f3e225926d06e5f\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, I think we will not be seeking leave to table reports from yesterday in a significant newspaper. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220263ef39cdca4010b0c7c8852fcdfa68\u0022\u003EDr Paul Hutchison\u003C/span\u003E: What changes to patient services, if any, is he aware of that have been undertaken in recent years as district health boards look to live within their means?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e2159bc7b0844f0be140d81c26def5e\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am just making sure that you are going to remind the Minister to stay within areas of his responsibility.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228637ff9ca5804bd2b37d35bbe3f764a0\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I do not think the member should be pre-empting by way of a point of order what Ministers may say. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200d23923255b40e294743f4e07e5a5e9\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I am aware of a number of changes to patient services under the previous Government, for which I have seen reports, such as the hundreds of people who had their home-cleaning services stopped in Wanganui a few years ago while Ruth Dyson was the Minister for Disability Issues. One would be very confident on the basis of this week\u2019s apparent outrage from Ruth Dyson that she would have fought these home-cleaning changes tooth and nail. But after searching high and low for copies of press statements, letters, or even a whisper, no one can find a snippet of protest from Ruth Dyson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aa162219a22e47a88d703f9fa683c2dd\u0022\u003EProject Protector\u2014Progress\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022 data-id=\u0022800bf1f5e6144749a37dd0a2208b6575\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E7. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022800bf1f5e6144749a37dd0a2208b6575\u0022\u003ETODD McCLAY (National\u2014Rotorua)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Defence: What progress has been made with Project Protector?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u002276b6243f9d634023ab33b7d6e2e8176e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002276b6243f9d634023ab33b7d6e2e8176e\u0022\u003EHon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence):\u003C/span\u003E We have now taken delivery of the first of the two offshore patrol vessels, the Otago. The delivery of the second, the Wellington, will take place in April. This completes the delivery of the Project Protector fleet, and it will be a substantial addition to the Navy. I might note that the programme has been bedevilled by delay and dispute, largely because the Labour Government chose a one-off solution with the Canterbury, which has led to a very large repair bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaf4e5e542e644419b8d34b7eea9e3a1\u0022\u003ETodd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: What progress is being made with the rectification of the defects of the Canterbury?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254c5303effdf4f029f617a5d1c8cb6c6\u0022\u003EHon Dr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: We have now settled the dispute over the defects of the Canterbury with BAE Systems, by way of mediation. BAE Systems has paid $84.6 million to the Crown, based on current exchange rates. I might note that Labour spent years talking about the problems but never actually got around to solving them. In contrast, we had to initiate a legal process, which has resulted in a very good outcome, and it will enable a comprehensive rectification of the defects of the Canterbury.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fbe17d48669647538f50618c81b60b8f\u0022\u003EEducation, National Standards\u2014Minister\u2019s Understanding of asTTle\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00226950e05d6f5e429f9263803d25087898\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E8. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226950e05d6f5e429f9263803d25087898\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Education: Does she understand the asTTle reporting system and the process leading to it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022 data-id=\u0022965c8a62ec58474da09ee2c5d88d2943\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022965c8a62ec58474da09ee2c5d88d2943\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education):\u003C/span\u003E I would not claim to have an understanding on a par with that of Professor Hattie, but I understand the core elements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3a4d834ad734962abc5f5d04edf33ca\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: What is the difference between the national standardisation used by asTTle and the standardisation required by her national standards?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298bdcaf49d2c47ec9681845404fdf6e8\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am advised that asTTle is set to population norms. National standards are nationally consistent benchmarks that set clear expectations about achievement and progress, and are aligned to ensure that students are on track to achieve National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) level 2. I am advised that in some cases the national standards expectations are above current norms. We have set these national standards at this level to ensure that all of our students are able to succeed at NCEA level 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228580d0be95654aa3a9d62314dfcc0791\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: What is her best estimate of the extra time that teachers will spend, and the cost of using a non-standardised system rather than one that is already standardised?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264dc7a92f8054323904894a0a1ceec20\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I say to the member that that would very much depend on the assessment tools that teachers are currently using and the effectiveness of those. Many teachers in our schools are already using assessment tools and practices extremely effectively, in which case for them very little will change. Perhaps all that might change is the additional requirement to report to parents against the national standards. But we know that there are many, many students whose teachers are not using effective assessment techniques and tools, and we hope that they will have to make many changes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225cf5f35fe767464aaf1fb152e1ab1d94\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: In light of the Minister\u2019s last answer, for a teacher currently using asTTle\u2014given that the Minister said that the cost would depend on the system that teachers currently used\u2014what is the Minister\u2019s best estimate of the extra time spent by the teacher and the extra cost to the school of using a non-standardised system rather than the already standardised asTTle system?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e8025b5a7d941b7a8d6aa1965a03e8b\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: It would depend on exactly what reports those teachers are currently giving parents. It is my understanding that there is not a standard asTTle report. But if teachers are using an asTTle report, they will have to provide an additional report that includes placing results and the progress of students against the national standards. However, if teachers are not producing an asTTle report for parents, they will have to produce just a report showing progress against the national standards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb97cd61bc3749178d2bb2fc12e2c58a\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: What advice has the Minister of Education received on the difference between asTTle norms and the benchmarks set by the national standards?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280b0a8fc65fd453d96fdd3947e2bc6fc\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am advised that asTTle is based on population norms\u2014that is, what students are currently learning. We know\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219523db33a894c0cb470b5eb766833dd\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the Minister. The House showed courtesy while the Minister was answering a question from the Opposition; I now ask the House to show the same courtesy while the Minister is answering a question from a member of the Government. I think that that is only fair and reasonable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022686be018cdc0480a8ac527c512379878\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am advised that asTTle is based on population norms\u2014that is, what students are currently learning. We know that, in this modern world, that is not significant enough for our students, and the national standards have been aligned through to NCEA level 2. We know that that is the level that students need for success. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6938a47321a474caec293f597351676\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Did I understand the Minister to just say that asTTle results are based on what students are currently learning; if not, would she care to revise that answer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274b5b14f896c4f90bfbe3592f4a1efda\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am happy to add to that: learning and achieving. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229042c03ed9664485a185f123d8def64c\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Does she accept that the asTTle reports for parents provide more, more in-depth, and more useful information to parents than her national standards will; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223f71c585e86477c80cbe823c4c63e0e\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: As I said to the member before, my understanding is that there is not one standard report from asTTle. Some parents whose schools are using asTTle are getting very detailed information. But I know of one parent, who has talked to me, whose school uses asTTle and translates the asTTle reports into \u201Caverage\u201D, \u201Cabove average\u201D, or \u201Cbelow average\u201D. So there is no standard asTTle report. What schools will have to do, in addition to anything else that they are reporting to parents, is to report progress against the national standards, in plain language, at least twice a year. We know that parents cannot wait for that to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264c66ca269844a3091f9592f8719d586\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Has she looked carefully at the asTTle graphs that are available for parents, which most schools using asTTle give to parents; and does she accept that the information in those graphs provides more, more in-depth, and more useful information to parents than the reports that will be provided as a result of her national standards?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022adb6a2f4c9984f04b6a3e8174e2b879c\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I have looked carefully at the console of reports. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226a9e82718e4845d99152705e5f01a459\u0022\u003EPassports\u2014Roll-out of New Passports\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022 data-id=\u00226306bbfeab7447e1933f57cdda86febd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003E9. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226306bbfeab7447e1933f57cdda86febd\u0022\u003EKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What reports has he received on the roll-out of new passports?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022 data-id=\u002240e37b75e8094e0e9ffa24e33aebce45\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002240e37b75e8094e0e9ffa24e33aebce45\u0022\u003EHon NATHAN GUY (Minister of Internal Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E I have received reports from the Department of Internal Affairs on how successful the transition to new passports has been. The last old-style e-passport was issued yesterday. From today we are issuing the new model solely, with new security features and a new black and silver design. Forty-five thousand of these passports have been issued, and the new technology is working very well. All production targets were met during the transition to the new-style e-passport, and they continue to be met.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a1a47a1b7f24ce68a0f0af47db2e67b\u0022\u003EKanwaljit Singh Bakshi\u003C/span\u003E: Why was it important to update the New Zealand passport?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227466774a6fc40f390faa7f069df6ce7\u0022\u003EHon NATHAN GUY\u003C/span\u003E: The New Zealand passport needs to be updated to keep up with technology and to stay ahead of fraudsters. The new passport has over 50 new security features. This helps to protect the good reputation that our passport enjoys overseas, and, indeed, it secures visa-free access for New Zealanders to over 50 countries. What is more, it is value for money; we have kept the price at the same level of $150 as previously.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002236a9b04862cb4d89ab55594608a0396c\u0022\u003EHousing\u2014Salvation Army Report\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u002270b4539f73784a3fb5f4e919f60c1464\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E10. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002270b4539f73784a3fb5f4e919f60c1464\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Housing: What is he doing to address the housing issues raised in the Salvation Army\u2019s recent State of the Nation Report?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec7b9a7f7a944d05b4862184dfffe2af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec7b9a7f7a944d05b4862184dfffe2af\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Acting Minister of Housing):\u003C/span\u003E As the Prime Minister appointed me to the role of Acting Minister of Housing only at lunchtime, I guess it will come as no surprise to the House to know that I have not, as yet, read the Salvation Army\u2019s recent State of the Nation Report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022363c02973ad74ff58e91899d8d736bea\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: What is he doing to address the urgent issue of homelessness in Auckland, given that more than 20,000 Aucklanders alone are now believed to be homeless?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022666c1c134cfc467b9880c82ae4c3dc13\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: I am still waiting on even initial briefing notes to come from my new department. Until I get those, I am not doing anything. [Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c65d52d711154b0d8d2109b486737fb7\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I say to honourable members that I have called their colleague Moana Mackey.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223742154c73e447d48140678b63e58ac6\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: I am sure that would be a great comfort to the homeless of Auckland. [Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249d6dc4533764a91bae7f32dc66e7753\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member to resume her seat. Members can see what happens when we do things that are out of order. It leads to disorder. I ask the member to please just ask her question, and I ask her colleagues not to interject while she is doing it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022892fe59b11db4210aa750212e14e5fa3\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by his Government\u2019s response to the report that changes to the Resource Management Act and the Building Act, as well as the Auckland super-city, will fix the homelessness problem, or does he agree with David Zussman from the Monte Cecilia Housing Trust, who said that that response lacks vision and leadership?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0357e9b435242c392cb5530cda96d2e\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: I think it will be no surprise to any member of the House that I stand by the Government\u2019s reaction to the report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ba104d363b14d7d9cf5f4a0b4a7695a\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: If the Resource Management Act and Building Act reforms are the answer to homelessness, how soon will these homes be available, given that 20,000 people are homeless now, and how many will be priced at an affordable level for someone who is homeless?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022364c77b72f254aad837b280e7a9eb275\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: If I could just divert from my portfolio of housing to the building and construction portfolio for a second, and say that only next week we will be launching, in cooperation with the Housing New Zealand Corporation, a new, low-cost house design and a sample home. These things are already under way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022baa4606bfaa8402c958d6ca7ad1e1e80\u0022\u003EParalympic Committee Athletics World Championships 2011\u2014Government Support\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002218f9e3ea-81c5-4414-af48-d6bb843a9227\u0022 data-id=\u0022e1eb940013e44548ac7f8e3c70d0ecd9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002218f9e3ea-81c5-4414-af48-d6bb843a9227\u0022\u003E11. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e1eb940013e44548ac7f8e3c70d0ecd9\u0022\u003EMELISSA LEE (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Economic Development: What support will the Government provide for the 2011 International Paralympic Committee Athletics World Championships?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u002236697e3a68934c398b349cfd251c3249\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002236697e3a68934c398b349cfd251c3249\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development):\u003C/span\u003E Last month I announced that the Government will contribute $400,000 towards the 2011 IPC Athletics World Championships, to be held in Christchurch in January 2011. The 2011 IPC Athletics World Championships are the world\u2019s second-largest international sports event for athletes with a disability, and they are expected to attract around 1,300 athletes and 900 officials, all coming from 75 countries. This is an elite international event, and it is the first in a great sporting year for New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002218f9e3ea-81c5-4414-af48-d6bb843a9227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f57e4a7f31f94d379d8a862d79c7e68f\u0022\u003EMelissa Lee\u003C/span\u003E: What is the expected legacy for New Zealand from hosting the 2011 IPC Athletics World Championships?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294ba7535f7eb4bdd9b21b7ea1a5d804f\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: The event will leave a significant social legacy; namely, the continued development of Paralympic sport in New Zealand. The event is a sporting showcase for elite athletes, and it will highlight many role models, not only for disabled but also for able-bodied individuals in New Zealand and around the world. In addition, it is estimated that the potential economic impact for Christchurch will be over $12 million. As well as this, media coverage of the championships is expected to be extensive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abbc7ef30f69454085048ae1bf340da2\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Is funding available from the Ministry of Economic Development for other international events held in New Zealand that attract international media and television coverage, such as the Rally of New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e779eaab97b34c5782a5574a4650292e\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: On a case by case basis, the member will be aware that the major events unit inside the Ministry of Economic Development considers support for events of that type.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc099355cb2f460d9b3eedf983b50845\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he decline an application from Motorsport New Zealand for support from the Major Events Development Fund for the Rally of New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e9e1ad89a654c909b60e4da98620f95\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: We set high criteria for the economic benefit that is to accrue from events like that. Of course, I suspect that the sum requested for that event would have been somewhat higher than that granted to the Paralympians.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022184a11358ab84a0db3de98fd908a0740\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: What steps will he take to ensure that New Zealand does not lose other significant events of a similar or larger scale to the 2011 IPC Athletics World Championships, particularly in light of the recent loss of the Rally of New Zealand after he refused to back it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b54d4f6767be42d6b11d843a73925d89\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: I am surprised to learn that I am personally responsible for the loss of the Rally of New Zealand event. I will say we are trying to encourage a pipeline of events that will occur in New Zealand over a number of years, where those events are to become annual, biennial, or whatever their frequency may be. We are also trying to encourage those events, on an increasing basis, to become self-sufficient. But we are very active in seeking opportunities for events that will give economic benefit and profile to New Zealand to be attracted to this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002269238d9f7dcf493884a06aff12beadaa\u0022\u003EPower Prices\u2014Reduction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u0022d311e925450f4faa8a98461ec995d39e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E12. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d311e925450f4faa8a98461ec995d39e\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What actions, if any, is he taking to reduce power prices?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022634c073fda694f3496263f2b3dc16472\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022634c073fda694f3496263f2b3dc16472\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources):\u003C/span\u003E I have often said that no Government can promise to lower power prices. Certainly, the Labour Opposition cannot do so, because under the Labour Government\u2019s watch residential power prices increased by three times the rate of inflation. The aim of the Government\u2019s electricity industry reforms is to flatten out the very steep price path that New Zealanders faced during those years. I would point out that since the National Government has been in office we have had a 1 percent price rise in real terms in the electricity sector. I hope that will continue through the coming year. It is significantly better than what was done by the previous administration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213f5bfce03a249519218b8a887c247f6\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: Does he know that his own expert advisory group says that, on average, 227 megawatts per year in new generation were added under Labour between 2004 and 2009, and that only 174 megawatts per year are projected to be added between 2009 and 2014\u2014not enough, according to the Electricity Commission, to keep the lights on past 2012?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b365f47f46f48598a3ae004dfc87f89\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, but I am also aware that those projections are somewhat determined by the ability of those proposing projects to get consent. I am confident that many of those seeking consents or considering seeking them are waiting for the Government to pass the next round of Resource Management Act legislation, which we believe will make it much, much more straightforward to gain consent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8df4811e90e4d8d8723a0e1b2c94be9\u0022\u003EJonathan Young\u003C/span\u003E: What is the Government doing to increase competition and constrain future electricity price increases?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290c4ee9f87e2438d81815b408d09320b\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: The electricity bill that is currently at the select committee contains a suite of important changes to the electricity sector. The key initiatives that will beef up competition include the transfer of Tekapo A and Tekapo B power stations from Meridian Energy to Genesis Energy; requiring all major electricity generators to put in place an accessible electricity hedge market; allowing lines companies back into electricity retailing, subject to strict controls; and establishing a $15 million fund over 3 years to promote customer switching for retailers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267e66f57fd464bdd8d0f8485158c4f51\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: Does he still say that it would be \u201Caudacious\u201D for any power company to raise its prices while he was still considering changes to the electricity sector; if so, what does he say to those New Zealanders now facing increased power bills while electricity companies ignore him and simply put up prices?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d8453232faa4b2bbf77f89de8267a75\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: I spoke before of the measurable period of price rises under the National Government. In that time we had a 1 percent, in real terms, price rise. That is a third of the record for each and every year of the 9 years of the Labour Government. So I think it is a very proud record. What I would say is that last year most power companies appear to have made reasonable profits, and they have done so while containing the price. I think that is the way we will see things happening in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257fe494ea95d4262ad1fef06a5b1ffd4\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: Has he seen comments from David Baldwin, the Chief Executive of Contact Energy, that \u201CThe outcome of the electricity review itself is of no particular concern to Contact.\u201D; if so, how does he expect to address issues within the electricity sector\u2014in particular, price rises\u2014when one of the major players in the industry dismisses his reforms and increases its prices by 5 percent?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022972a5727ec33450d968030290d379151\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: The reason that Mr Baldwin suggested that the Electricity Act changes were of no consequence or concern to Contact Energy is that it supports them and knows that it will be able to operate successfully within them. It is the most balanced electricity generating company in New Zealand, and I welcome his comments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214c8afa56c1a46e5946845e94154acdb\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dff9170964914de6a2fa91e1b6389230\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: By my reckoning and from the advice I have received, the Labour Party has now used its 28 supplementary questions, and that is not counting the one where I gave the Hon Ruth Dyson the opportunity to repeat one of them\u2014I did not count that one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e2fd934b0474ebcb49e6e09efa6a406\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I know that this is relatively unusual and I am doing something that I have never done before. I am almost certain that I used five supplementary questions. My colleague the whip counted my asking five supplementary questions, which is what I was allocated. Your\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd8954f897a9443582c1b7ee60acca2f\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Can\u2019t count.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a28fe79e1a6f48e0a068d04d3a7f612f\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: That is the man who should have\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f121289c9fe43b685c3be94cfc6a948\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will resume his seat immediately, and that is the end of that point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002299d4de53e2774202859586f18ee3a725\u0022\u003EStudent Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022282f20c7d6d047e5b37404aec732f794\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000566\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00223b4e4af433d341149db41da79c853008\u0022\u003EPart 2  Consequential amendments to, and revocations of, other enactments (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae0b0e47f8c243b487ced601b15f3ae0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae0b0e47f8c243b487ced601b15f3ae0\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will continue with my speech on Part 2 of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I was saying that Part 2 basically makes sure that there is consistency with regard to what is in Part 1. We were discussing the importance of student loans for particular groups in our society, and the need to ensure, moving forward, that those groups have access to student loans, because of the fact that unfortunately not every member of this society has parents who can afford to pay for their tertiary studies. We need to make sure that particular groups in society have equal opportunity to access quality tertiary educational opportunities. That is what we were touching on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EForgive me, Mr Chairperson, if I cannot do this, but I want to check whether I can put something from Part 1 to the Minister. You are shaking your head; OK, then, I will not go there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWe talked earlier about our own experiences with student loans at university, and I talked about the fact that not only did I spend 11 years at the University of Auckland but I spent it working and studying there, so I have had a lot of experience with M\u0101ori and Pacific students, and also with students who are sole parents. We discussed the fact that for many of those students, their time at university does not necessarily fit in the 3-year or 4-year degree time frame, or whatever time their programme was meant to take. In fact, I think that when I was at the University of Auckland, there was some research done on the fact that quite often not just M\u0101ori and Pacific students but students in general struggled to finish their degrees within the time periods that were set. There are good reasons for that. I alluded to the fact that for some students the tertiary environment, and the university environment in particular, can be quite foreign, given that some students come from families where they are the first to go on to study at a university. It is important that we take that into consideration. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EI heard one member from the other side of the Chamber in a speech about 2 years ago talk about his own experience at university. He went on to do a PhD, but he said that it took him longer than 3 years to complete the initial BA. If he had taken out a student loan\u2014even though I know that during his time he did not need to access a loan, because in his day he was actually paid to attend university\u2014then that would not have been a waste of money, because that particular member, although taking, I think, 5 years to complete a 3-year BA degree, did go on to do a master\u2019s degree and later a PhD. So, moving forward, we need to make sure that the Government does not narrow the criteria with regard to student loans, and it needs to make sure that it does not limit access to the opportunities that tertiary education has to offer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWhen Labour was in Government for the previous 9 years it placed a concerted effort on making sure that it lifted the tertiary participation rate of particular groups\u2014on making sure that it improved the numbers of M\u0101ori going through to higher level tertiary education, and on doubling the number of Pacific people who were achieving bachelor degree qualifications. That is something that we on this side of the Chamber hope that the Government will continue to support. We hope that it continues to invest in tertiary education, and continues to support the participation of groups that have been under-represented in higher-level tertiary education in the past. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EUnfortunately, we have not seen any signals from the Government with regard to that. Not only has it slashed the important funding that went to adult and community education but it has refused over the last year and a half to lift the caps on the numbers of people being able to access universities and polytechnics at a time when we know that employment is scarce. So when there are all these young people\u2014I think there is something like a 30.8 percent youth unemployment rate for M\u0101ori, and a 29.8 percent youth unemployment rate for Pacific people\u2014out there searching for opportunities to upskill and train, this Government has shut things down for them. I think that is actually abhorrent. Not only do they not have opportunities for employment but also this Government is not supporting them with opportunities for going on to training or upskilling. At the end of the day that will be detrimental not only for those individuals but also for their communities. In the future, in the long term, it will be quite detrimental to this country, because we know that future estimates of the demographics show us that down the track a large proportion of the population will be M\u0101ori and Pacific. Ageing P\u0101keh\u0101 will be reliant on a young M\u0101ori and Pacific working base being able to support them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThose are just some of the issues that have come up in respect of this bill and of what the Government is proposing. It is not just the bill in front of us that concerns us; it is the wider discussions that are taking place. It is the public statements that the Prime Minister and the tertiary education Minister are out there making. Those statements are of concern for members on this side of the Chamber, because we are concerned about heading down a track where the Government will make tertiary education less accessible for some groups\u2014the groups for whom we have supported an increase in the numbers participating in tertiary education. We are very concerned that the Government will be, basically, cutting them off.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EPart 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228f547cdb00fb47658cbba1d524c05812\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u0022f473cb6b95f149b79d3415393fb57a0d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f473cb6b95f149b79d3415393fb57a0d\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will speak to clauses 1 and 2 in particular. There are things I want to say about the fact that the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill is being progressed under urgency. I do not lay the blame for that at the door of the Minister in charge of the bill, the Hon Peter Dunne. It is clear in clause 2 that the commencement date of some clauses is 1 April 2010, so it is important that the legislation is passed before that date. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe House is sitting under urgency on Tuesday, 23 February, although it is actually 25 February outside this Chamber. Under urgency, of course, time stops on the day that urgency is accorded. The point about urgency is that it should be used sparingly, for matters that really require it, and for matters that are, in fact, urgent. There is time between now and 1 April to address this issue, and to see this bill through to its conclusion, but, no, the Government has chosen to put it through in urgency. This bill was presented to the House for the first time in August last year, and the second time was in November last year. Now we are in the Committee stage of the bill at the end of February\u2014under urgency. It is completely plain to everybody that it has simply been a subterfuge for the Government to excuse itself from at least one question time this week. So urgency was not essential, and it has been applied. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis is one of the few bills that has, in clause 2, a reference to a date that I perfectly understand as being an essential date for the application, particularly, of taxation legislation\u20141 April 2010. But it could have been managed differently. That is not the fault of the Minister in charge of the bill, but it is directly the fault of the Leader of the House, who determines the agenda of the House at any one time. This is a sign, again, of a deal of incompetence that we have seen coming from the Government in even managing a simple bill, which the Minister introduced to the House in perfectly good time. It was properly considered by the Education and Science Committee and was reported back in November of last year. Since then the Leader of the House has been unable to bring it through in a reasonable and measured way, in time for it to be implemented by 1 April. This is a notice to all Ministers in Cabinet that they need to take the Leader of the House aside and say that they will not be made fools of in this way. They need to weigh up whether being protected from question time is worth being made fools of, in terms of parliamentary procedure. Clause 2, the commencement clause, is apposite, and it is entirely reasonable to make some comment upon the progress and process surrounding this bill in this way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI want to talk about the title of the bill. When it is enacted, it will be the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Act 2009. It should perhaps be named the \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions For Now) Amendment Act 2009.\u201D It is not entirely clear whether this legislation will survive subsequent legislation that the Government may have in mind to narrow, restrict, shut down, and make less accessible student loans and allowances. That is what we heard signalled by the Prime Minister in his Prime Minister\u2019s statement at the beginning of this parliamentary year. It is what we have had underscored since then by the new Minister for Tertiary Education, the Hon Steven Joyce. Steven Joyce is a man who does what he says he will do, and he is a man who clearly has plans for his portfolios.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c159b236dfc44971b908326710a9e715\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Except for telecommunications, where he has no plans.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002291ece9ee98784e0aa1f76e38a3fbbeb1\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: With the now glaring exception, my colleague reminds us, of telecommunications and the roll-out of broadband. However, let us assume that the Minister does have a plan for student loans, and let us hope that this bill does not run foul of that. Let us hope that what endures after the Minister Steven Joyce has finished with student loans and allowances is access to those loans and allowances still extended to Tokelau, still extended to the Cook Islands, still extended to citizens of Niue, and still extended to those who might one day live on the Ross Dependency\u2014where in the meantime the penguins currently inhabit that part of the realm of New Zealand. Although it says it is a Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Act, I would suggest it is in fact an Act for now only.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022 data-id=\u00220f608b074ea64a489b3662d72ea8db9a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f608b074ea64a489b3662d72ea8db9a\u0022\u003EGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour\u2014Wellington Central):\u003C/span\u003E I want to talk a little about the title clause of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. We were advised earlier on by Louise Upston, I think when she was speaking in the second reading, that we were not focusing enough on the importance of some of the provisions in this bill. Putting some of them under the title \u201CMiscellaneous Provisions\u201D probably does not adequately reflect the importance of what we are doing here. In particular, I think the clause that increases the deduction rate from 10c in the dollar to 15c in the dollar is potentially a very serious thing for the people who will end up having to pay that additional rate. I would not necessarily see that as a miscellaneous provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EI think it would be better for us to look at the reality of the bill, and then work out what it should be called, especially given the present environment, which we have already discussed recently. Steven Joyce has come in as the Minister for Tertiary Education, and we know that Mr Joyce has already told us that the support for the interest-free student loan scheme by the National Government is a political call. It has nothing to do with principle, nothing to do with what National thinks is good for education in New Zealand, and nothing to do with what it thinks is right for the economy of New Zealand in ensuring that our graduates stay here and contribute to the economy rather than go overseas\u2014there is nothing about that. He said it was a straight-out political call. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003ETherefore I think this bill could aptly be renamed the \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Political Call Bill\u201D. That is what is going on here. The National Party members do not want us to really focus on the fact that Steven Joyce has taken over the tertiary education portfolio with a clear instruction from John Key to look at it and look at tightening up the eligibility for student support. That is what Mr Key said in his Prime Minister\u2019s statement to Parliament in early February this year. He said the Government would look at the issue of those people who spent too long in tertiary study and at whether there should be restrictions on their eligibility for student support. He said perhaps there would be something introduced around people having to pass their courses sufficiently quickly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EOn this side of the Chamber we are concerned about those potential developments. We see a bill in front of us now that makes some reasonably important but minor changes, and they are useful. But at the same time we face a situation where the Government is hanging on to its belief in interest-free student loans only because it is a political call, not because it thinks they are a good idea and they are delivering for New Zealand. Therefore I think the bill could easily be retitled in that way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EPerhaps another title, though, that would pick up the overall essence of the Government\u2019s policy around interest-free student loans would be the \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (Missing Bones) Bill\u201D. This may be confusing for some people who have not been following the story so far. But when Labour introduced interest-free student loans in 2005, John Key was the finance spokesperson for the National Party, and he stood in this Chamber and said the interest-free student loan policy that Labour was bringing in was ridiculous. He said it would be opposed by the National Party members with every bone in their bodies. Well, here we are in 2010, and following on from the 2008 election, when the political call that Steven Joyce mentioned was made, we do not see much in the way of every bone being used. In fact, the bones are missing. There is no attempt by National to turn this scheme round, because politically it knows it cannot. But National is not committed to the scheme. In the long term, we know that National would rather roll back the interest-free student loan scheme. The introduction of Steven Joyce as the Minister for Tertiary Education is a clear sign that National wants to get at interest-free student loans. It wants to restrict the number of people who can take out student loans and restrict the ability of people to take them out over a period of time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226007dc96-f459-4cdd-9972-4fde2c994088\u0022\u003EWe believe that is a very dangerous path to go down. There is nothing more important, as we come out of the recession, than to have people increase their skills so that they can contribute to the economy. Earlier in the debate I mentioned the fact that the Australian Government responded to the recession by moving quickly to ensure that people who lost their jobs had access to training and tertiary study. It made sure that there were incentives for them to be able to do that, so that they could contribute to the economy when Australia came out of recession. In New Zealand we saw none of that. We saw a continuation of the cap that sees tertiary institutions turning people away, particularly at the polytechnic level, where polytechnics face budget cuts from the National Government. Therefore, we do not see New Zealanders being trained and upskilled to be able to contribute to the economy as we come out of the recession. That is a great shame. This bill and the activity of the National Government around tertiary education could be so much more than they are. We could be sitting here today to work out how to increase the skill level of New Zealanders, but unfortunately we are not doing that. This bill is misnamed; it is actually about National wishing us to look elsewhere.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u00220728b2c3d25c44db97236c49ea108622\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220728b2c3d25c44db97236c49ea108622\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am happy to take a call on these clauses, and I, too, have some suggestions for alternative names for this legislation. This legislation, which Labour will be supporting, is, of course, part of a much bigger picture around interest-free student loans. The title could be \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (I\u2019m Glad the First Piece of Legislation We\u2019ve Had Come to the House Isn\u2019t Very Bad, But I Worry About the Next Ones) Amendment Bill\u201D. We know, as my colleague Maryan Street has said, that the interest-free student loan scheme is in trouble. We know that National does not like interest-free student loans, because it rallied vociferously against them when the previous Labour Government introduced them. We were told that the interest-free loans were corrupt. In fact, John Key said they were corrupt\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d22d9b1f7bc48d284fde33aa87a14a6\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CIrresponsible\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228fdcdcedc6904a2c9254cfc4ec77cced\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014\u201Cirresponsible\u201D. They were a bribe, says the man who, I bet, never had a student loan. That brings me to my second suggestion for a title: \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (Why Don\u2019t You Actually Ask Students Who Have a Loan About What It\u2019s Like to Have a Student Loan) Amendment Bill\u201D. One of the things that concern me is that even in this debate we have been lectured, at length, by people from the Government who have never had a student loan. I have had a student loan. I had it at the worst time to have a student loan, in the 1990s. I had it when I was paying interest while I was studying. It was daily compounding interest. I was working 20 hours a week. I say to Government members that if they are concerned about people who are failing their courses, look at how many hours that students have to work to support themselves, which should be hours spent studying, but they are working long hours to support themselves. I worked 20 hours a week while I was at university, and it was to the detriment of my studies. I did not fail but I could have done an awful lot better if I had been able to focus solely on my studies and not have to worry about how the rent would be paid or how we would be able to afford to pay the power bill that week. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe title \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (Why Don\u2019t You Actually Ask Students Who Have a Loan About What\u2019s It\u2019s Like to Have a Student Loan) Amendment Bill\u201D might be a good way to go. We have heard some pretty patronising speeches about how I should just be grateful that I had a student loan. Well, I was not grateful for it. I was grateful that I got to go to university but I was not grateful for the fact that I worked 20 hours a week to keep my loan down. I was at university for 4 years, and I left university with a loan of about $15,000 or $16,000. By the time I had graduated, the loan was already into the $20,000s and I had not even started working yet. I was not grateful for that aspect of the student loan scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI notice that all the members opposite who are chipping away had free university education, and I ask them again why they do not actually talk to people who went through the scheme. If members do not understand the incentives around repayment, then how can they put that into place in the policy? If they do not understand what it is like to have a student loan, what it is like to think that one will never pay it off\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1648ebac19444519c8e4e3958be8377\u0022\u003EHon Georgina te Heuheu\u003C/span\u003E: She thinks that some of us have never had offspring with student loans. Some of us have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022649c93a5c32d4f30b3c6a126949c4fc2\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Minister Te Heuheu that people can think they will never be able to pay it off, because when they graduate the 10 percent that comes out of their income automatically is actually less than the interest for that period, so they are repaying their loan and it is going up and up. So people think they will never be able to repay it. Those members opposite who have never had that experience should talk to people who have, and they will tell them what they need to do\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ba8a8b533a74e3cbe0d71e4f2341a9d\u0022\u003EHon Paula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Get the facts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022013f6d4157a048898df61d7c66a0cc5e\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Paula Bennett, who had the training incentive allowance to help her get off the domestic purposes benefit, and then cut it for every other domestic purposes benefit mother who wanted to get off the benefit, should probably\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222640e20815c848f0bde1100ce5ffab5d\u0022\u003EHon Paula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Look at the facts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277341933688a41a3882bbdf79a547ea4\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: How did the Minister get to university?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205571d39ff954d20b66db6ce8aeae222\u0022\u003EHon Paula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: I had a student loan, actually.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288f8fdec7928450a86f0c5b156953e3a\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: How did the Minister get a student loan to go to university? That Minister cut the tertiary training incentive allowance to every other domestic purposes benefit mother who wanted to get off the benefit. She pulled the ladder up behind her, after that scheme helped her to get off the domestic purposes benefit. Good on her for doing that, but I think it is mildly repugnant when the scheme that that Minister benefited from was cut so that no other domestic purposes benefit mother could climb that same ladder. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EBut I come back to the bill and suggest the title \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (Save Our Interest-free Student Loan) Amendment Bill\u201D. The interest-free student loan scheme is at risk. We can see from the reaction of those on the other side how much they do not like having to listen to us explain about the value of the interest-free student loan scheme. I am proud about Labour\u2019s record in this area. I am proud that the first thing we did when we became the Government was to remove the interest from loans while students were studying, because that was horribly unfair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u002277dc0aaf8d3e41c1b6f0f7753436fc48\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002277dc0aaf8d3e41c1b6f0f7753436fc48\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I start my speech by congratulating Moana Mackey. It is really good to hear from a relatively young person, and I must say that Moana Mackey is celebrating a birthday very soon. Moana Mackey is very aware of the costs of being a student and the advantages of what happened with the interest-free student loan scheme. The introduction of interest-free loans was one of the proudest moments in Labour\u2019s term in office. Students were absolutely delighted at having some hope of cutting into the principal of the debt they had incurred while they were studying. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EAs other speakers have said\u2014and I say it again\u2014the previous Labour Government\u2019s interest-free loan scheme was labelled by then National Opposition as \u201Cirresponsible\u201D, as \u201Cbuying votes\u201D, and all sorts of other things. National members were absolutely opposed to it. They said it was the worst thing that the Government could ever do. So I guess the name of this bill could be the \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (We Didn\u2019t Actually Get Rid of the Interest Free Student Loan Scheme: We Will Make Some Technical Amendments; There Are Other Ways to Fleece Students in This Country) Amendment Bill\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWhat would those other ways be? I see Paul Quinn wondering what they could be. Certainly, it would be the ability of students in this environment to pay back their loans. The reality for most students is that they study during the year. They have part-time jobs so they do not have to take on so much of a loan. Maybe they work during their holiday period so they are able to pay off some of the principal of their loan. Well, that cannot happen under this Government. Has this Government done anything to assist in providing jobs and opportunities? Has it done anything to assist our industries to get through these tough times? No, it has not; it has done quite the opposite. Again, students are on the wrong side of that, but they will go out and look for jobs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI know that many members opposite denigrate students, but we know that students work very hard. They work hard in their studies, and then they try to secure employment to assist them during their study time so they can get rid of some of the principal on their loan. I have spoken to so many students who have said that it just is not possible to get jobs, despite the Minister standing in the Chamber and talking about all the opportunities that the Government will give young people. We know, in the substance of it, that there no jobs or opportunities out there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThis bill is technical, but we also look at what else is on the Government\u2019s agenda. This bill does no harm to students, but what could be on the agenda for students in the future? We know there is a veiled threat, because we heard the Prime Minister talk about lifting the cap on fees\u2019 institutions. So what do we know will happen? When Labour was in Government we took some very responsible moves, which were not supported by the National Opposition at the time, to ensure that student fees did not escalate way out of control as they had done under the previous National Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EMr Key has referred to an \u201Cinflexible and bureaucratic funding and policy framework\u201D. What does that mean? It means a framework that ensures that student costs do not romp away\u2014that there is a cap on the fees that institutions are able to pay. So Mr Key\u2019s comment tells me that tertiary education will soon move into the National Government\u2019s market approach to things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022 data-id=\u0022ff7f9e1c5526462c962d52106979949e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ff7f9e1c5526462c962d52106979949e\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue):\u003C/span\u003E Yesterday I was listening to a discussion about language on that great national icon, Radio New Zealand. It was stated that the great American writer Mark Twain was known for his precision in language. He was very critical of adverbs and adjectives, and he wrote in short sentences. Members may be wondering what the relevance of this discussion is to the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I have been here for a little while avidly listening to some very strong arguments being advanced from members on the other side of the Committee about how the bill could be retitled. I have mulled over in my mind some suggestions from various members. I say to Moana Mackey that she fails the Mark Twain test. Her suggested amendments were far too long.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022915d42bc5b1d47578ec3aa722b6aaaa6\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: I passed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aba52c6d5a964cf9b61fd3aab3f51d0b\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE\u003C/span\u003E: I will come to Maryan Street in a minute. Lynne Pillay\u2019s amendment seemed to never end. The problem I have in trying to apply the Mark Twain test to this is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215a6bce59b3c4ddeb2942a2dae84a236\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s why they couldn\u2019t circumcise Muldoon, isn\u2019t it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b33311218b934c6e960389d727c519bd\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE\u003C/span\u003E: I do not know what he had to do with Mark Twain, but that may be another story. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe point I am making is that this bill\u2019s title is an accurate description of what the bill contains. It might not be the most exciting title, but it is certainly the most accurate and it passes the Mark Twain test. That is why, having heard the arguments put forward from members opposite, I am not persuaded that a change is in order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EI heard the Hon Maryan Street make reference to the timing of this bill in the context of the current urgency. I was grateful for her that I was excluded from her excoriating criticism. However, I am concerned that this bill be passed as soon as possible and I will tell members why. In one of the earlier parts of this bill, we passed some very important provisions relating to students being able to study overseas and access a student loan. Members will be aware that that provision is backdated to 2007. A lot of students have been waiting for this provision to pass because they will now be able to access it and they have been uneasy\u2014I know this from the correspondence I have received from many of them, and in particular from their parents\u2014at the uncertainty that has prevailed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EI am very keen to see the bill passed. I would have loved to see it passed last year, but other circumstances got in the way. I am very pleased that it now will pass and those people will get the benefit. From the bottom of my heart, I thank those members of the Opposition who have taken such a constructive interest in the grammar and construction of the title. I have listened to what they have said, but I think on balance the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill captures it all, really.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u00225433eba2b6fa4841a61c049801436bee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225433eba2b6fa4841a61c049801436bee\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have some ideas for what we could rename the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill, but I will get on to that shortly. I refer to something that Moana Mackey talked about. She said that while she was studying during the 1990s, even though she was not working full time\u2014she was studying part time\u2014every time she got that statement from the Inland Revenue Department she saw that interest had been added on to her student loan. That is something that I saw, that Grant Robertson saw, and that a number of us saw. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWe were very thankful when the Labour Government introduced interest-free student loans in 2005, despite opposition from the National Party at that time. National thought that it was corrupt and irresponsible of the Labour Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c79ba277bc14589a9b59f14f159428c\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: A hoax, they called it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022435b7ba386ef4f1e82695f5e0f1a05d4\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: National called it a hoax and thought it was irresponsible of the Labour Government to bring in a provision that ensured all New Zealanders had the opportunity to have equal access to tertiary education. We know that one of the biggest barriers to participation in tertiary education is the finances. As a person who went through tertiary study during the very, very bad 1990s, all I can say is that I appreciated the fact that, in 2005, student loans were made interest free. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EAcross the course of this debate we have had a few interjections and comments from the floor. I want to clarify something for Mr Garrett, who interjected earlier and asked whether I had even graduated. That is typical of the attitude from Mr Garrett. I will clarify for him that, yes, I did graduate. I graduated three different times with three different qualifications, so I thank him very much for that query. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EIf we look at the title of the bill, we see it is the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I think that when thinking of different titles for this bill, we need to look at the broader picture with regard to the public comments that have been made by National members of Parliament, including the Prime Minister, and some of the actions that National has taken on tertiary education during its term in Government. One possible alternative title for the bill could be the \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (Does Not Really Make Up for Paula Bennett\u2019s Training Incentive Allowance Cuts, But Anyway) Amendment Bill\u201D. That goes back to what I was saying before with regard to some of the actions that have been taken with tertiary education and the fact that the National Government does not take seriously the need for a range of different people, particularly those who are marginalised or underrepresented in tertiary education, to have equal access to tertiary education. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EAnother possible title I think we could add to the mix might be the \u201CStudent Loan Scheme (We Will Tut\u016B With It Now But Make the Drastic Changes Later) Amendment Bill\u201D, because that is basically what the Prime Minister and the Minister for Tertiary Education have indicated to the public they will be doing by their recent comments that they will be taking a serious look at the student loan scheme. The Prime Minister has alluded to the fact that some students have taken advantage of the scheme, or he believes that they have been mucking around and not taking it seriously. All of those things indicate that down the track, National will be looking to make drastic changes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EAs has been mentioned in this Chamber today, the ones who will be affected by the changes that we anticipate the Government will make down the track are those from lower-income families, M\u0101ori and Pasifika, and also, as I mentioned before, women. Already we have received a number of letters and emails from women stating that it would be very difficult for them to study this year, knowing that the training incentive allowance will not be available for them. The Minister for Social Development and Employment said that she would put in a provision so that they could have an extra $500 on their student loan, but, for a student, $500 on a student loan is nothing compared with the $3,800 that was cut from the training incentive allowance. That money was a cut for women who are looking after children by themselves and who are already struggling with things like childcare and even transport with regard to getting to their tertiary institution. Many of them have come out of sometimes tumultuous relationships, and we have this Minister for Social Development and Employment deciding to cut something from them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022 data-id=\u002205610163245d4386b1dc36bb254d5575\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002205610163245d4386b1dc36bb254d5575\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS (Labour\u2014Rimutaka):\u003C/span\u003E I will take a very brief call; this time I will be reasonably brief on this final point. We are debating the title and commencement clause of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I do not intend to suggest a whole raft of alternative titles to the bill, as some of my colleagues have. However, I acknowledge the contribution of the Minister in the chair, the Hon Peter Dunne, in this debate. I have been in the Chamber for most of the Committee stage on this bill, as I know the Minister of Revenue has been, although a little earlier in the day than we might have initially anticipated. I thank him for engaging with the debate. We on this side of the Chamber are not used to having the opportunity to put questions to a Minister in the Committee stage and have the Minister stand up, answer them, and engage in that kind of interaction. That is what the Committee stage of a debate should be all about; I can see the Chair is agreeing with me on that. It is unusual but it is very welcome. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI think the Minister has answered a number of the questions we put forward. I put forward questions to him earlier on about diplomats and about the thresholds. He has engaged with us on those issues and I think that provides some reassurance to people who are listening in on this debate that even though this bill does not necessarily address all of the issues or the technical concerns that exist with the current interest-free student loans scheme, the Government has at least taken on board some of those issues. I was also very pleased to hear the Minister acknowledge the concern around diplomats, and he gave us a commitment that he would look further into that issue. I am more than happy to talk to him about that issue further at any point if he wishes to do so. I am happy to give him some examples of people who have been captured by that particular problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EThat was all I wanted to say on this particular part of the bill. I just wanted to acknowledge the contribution the Minister has made and to thank him for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022 data-id=\u0022312dd413c0034297ad71ed87b19b2692\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022312dd413c0034297ad71ed87b19b2692\u0022\u003ECATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Chair. I will take a very short call. I would like to start by saying that urgency does not always bring out the best in us. It sometimes leads to flogging a dead horse or working out just how many ways one can say the same thing as someone else without using or stealing his or her precise words. I do not want to do that. But I would like to disagree with the Minister of Revenue about the title of the bill. I feel that the title, although it has a certain musical ring, is somewhat disingenuous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003E\u201CMiscellaneous\u201D is a beautiful word. It is a marvellous, colourful word, but it suggests very, very small random issues, and it is not accurate in terms of the way the Green Party sees this bill. I have also learnt in my brief time in this Chamber that we take on words like \u201Cmiscellaneous\u201D at face value at our peril. In this place it is essential to read the fine print, and not only to read the fine print but also to get 12 other people to read it and then consult widely, and exhaustively, and extremely\u2014as a result of urgency\u2014with at least the groups who are most affected by the bill, and then after all of that assume the worst. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EI like Mark Twain\u2019s idea of brevity and I would like to suggest some brief titles that would satisfy the Green Party. One is \u201CGive With One Hand, Punish with the Other\u201D; the other is \u201CFifteen Cents in the Dollar or Else\u201D. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022 data-id=\u00228486586160574cf284e87fa5c6163e07\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228486586160574cf284e87fa5c6163e07\u0022\u003EHon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill is a relatively\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ac24407f67041c2b5b5b51c85722876\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Was it a good book?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9e043be74df48f8ae85e63ed5ae4907\u0022\u003EHon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS\u003C/span\u003E: Do not get me sidetracked! This bill is a relatively simple one. I think it is fair to say that the title of the bill reflects the purpose and intent of the bill. I think it is time that members stop wasting the time of this House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b134611603744db488fe03e9a5916958\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 113\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022a364d56e29a44e19b3502a470989c8e6\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 113\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229e81961cbed54fc580cde70488a78139\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 113\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000634\u0022\u003EBill reported without amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000635\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220d7bf26d993b49e7a7ecfafced350096\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022 data-id=\u002204da129bec0443b2ae801c719d2a8778\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002204da129bec0443b2ae801c719d2a8778\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. This bill includes a suite of mainly technical changes to the student loan repayment rules to ensure that the law is clear and consistent, and that it operates as intended. The bill also extends interest-free loans to borrowers from Niue, the Cook Islands, and Tokelau, which share a special relationship with us as part of the realm of New Zealand. As the Ross Dependency is also part of the realm of New Zealand, people who go there will also be eligible for an interest-free loan. There was some debate in the Committee stage about how many people would actually go to the Ross Dependency and be eligible for a loan, and whether we would be, in fact, producing a nation of well-educated penguins. The reality is that there will be some people on scientific exchange who will benefit from this provision. Although they will not be great in number, I suspect that their contribution to New Zealand in future years will be great in substance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThese borrowers will have to comply with the same requirement to be in one of those countries for 183 days, in the same way as New Zealand borrowers, so that borrowers from a realm country have an incentive to return home after their study, and to make a positive contribution towards their country\u2019s future. That provision is probably of greater impact with regard to Niue, the Cook Islands, and Tokelau, than the Ross Dependency, but the same point applies nonetheless. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe bill also extends interest-free loans to include students who choose to further their education overseas through full-time study under formal exchange programmes or formal agreements between New Zealand and overseas tertiary education providers. There is some anomaly in this area at the moment and this change will be of considerable benefit to a number of New Zealand students, particularly as they go further through their studies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe bill also includes a number of small refinements that provide greater clarity to borrowers. They were added at the select committee consideration. The first of those changes defines the term \u201Coverseas tertiary provider\u201D so that it is clear what type of overseas organisation borrowers must be engaged in full-time study with in order to qualify for interest-free loan status. That will immediately deal with some concerns there might be about the bona fides of some of the organisations and institutions that people are enrolled with. The other change extends the overseas exemption to include those who are engaged in full-time postgraduate study overseas if their studies cannot be completed in New Zealand. When we talk about having a highly skilled nation and upskilling the intellectual capacity of our public, that ability to go overseas to complete postgraduate study when it is not available in New Zealand is particularly important. The purpose of these measures is to recognise the value that students who pursue further training and study overseas bring to New Zealand as well as encouraging them to take up the opportunities to do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe remaining changes that the bill introduces are largely technical or remedial in nature. They include an amendment to correct an unintended change to the hardship relief provisions that was made by the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Act 2007, a change that allows the Inland Revenue Department to raise the compulsory repayment deduction rate from 10 percent to 15 percent to help ensure that borrowers pay their correct loan repayment amounts, and the removal of a technical problem so that borrowers who return to New Zealand and wish to fully repay their loans before they have met the 183-day requirement to qualify for an interest-free loan can now do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThere was some debate during the Committee stage about the adequacy of its title. A number of suggestions were made by members, particularly from the Opposition side of the House, to greatly extend the title of the bill to maybe more accurately, in their minds, reflect some of its provisions. But on balance, and I am sure the House will concur with me, having heard what this bill is about it was decided that the title Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill was, in fact, a more accurate, if less colourful, description of the bill\u2019s title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EAs the bill comes to its third reading, I acknowledge all of those who have contributed to its successful passage thus far. In particular, I acknowledge the policy officials from the Inland Revenue Department and our drafter for their work on the details of the bill. I acknowledge those who made submissions to the Education and Science Committee and others who made submissions aimed at improving the practical application of the measures. I want to record my thanks to the select committee for the detailed consideration that it gave the bill and for its recommendations, which have given greater clarity to the legislation. I also thank those who participated in what was, I think, a good-natured and constructive debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EAs the bill now stands, the measures that are contained in it will help to ensure that the student loan scheme works in the way that it should for both borrowers and the Crown. That has to be important, given that the opportunities the student loan scheme provides to so many students have to be matched by the Crown\u2019s responsibility to manage what is now a multibillion-dollar asset in terms of outstanding loan liabilities. It is a balanced process. I think that it has been widely accepted by the House, and with that, I have great pleasure in commending the bill to the House for its third reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u0022fad6847985624a47b2e54c7c1fe09e63\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fad6847985624a47b2e54c7c1fe09e63\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to support this legislation, which was introduced by the Minister of Revenue, who has just resumed his seat. At its third reading, I have to say that I have been feeling sorry for the Minister. This Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill should have been reasonably pedestrian legislation to usher through the House. It had the support of the Labour Party, and the only dissenting voice was from the Green Party, for the reasons that its members have described earlier in this debate. This legislation has been loaded into urgency for no good reason. It could have been dealt with in December; the report of the Education and Science Committee was presented to the House on 27 November, and, if I remember correctly, we sat quite late in December. It could have been dealt with in the ordinary scheme of things, with sufficient attention being paid to it, allowing it to be in force by 1 April, which is one of the critical dates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EHowever, for the reasons that we have described previously in this debate, the Government has seen fit to cover its own sins and inadequacies by putting this bill into an urgency motion that was sought predominantly to avoid question time, and to thereby protect weakened, ill-performing Ministers from the democratic scrutiny that occurs at 2 o\u2019clock every day of parliamentary sittings. On top of that, I have been feeling sorry for the Minister about this, because\u2014[Interruption] Members opposite might not have noticed, but we did not have question time yesterday. Because of the sting that the Government received from that in the media, it decided to give in today. But, more important, I have been feeling sorry for the Minister in his presentation of something that should have been reasonably pedestrian legislation, because since the select committee reported back on the bill to the House we have had an explosion of antagonism towards students by the Government. Now this Minister has to front a perfectly good bill in the context of several depth charges that have been dropped into the tertiary education arena by this Government. Let me cite three. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EFirst of all, there was the Prime Minister\u2019s statement at the beginning of this year, in which he said that the Government will take a careful look at the policy settings with regard to student support. Of course, that left everybody wondering what it meant. Does it mean that the Government intends to restrict access to tertiary institutions by not making them open entry for people over the age of 20? I will come back to that one in a moment. Does it mean that the Government is intending to make loans and allowances harder to access? I will come back to that one in a moment, too. The Government unleashed that set of imponderables to begin with upon this Minister and upon a perfectly ordinary piece of legislation. I say that without meaning to be dismissive of it at all, I tell the Minister. Secondly, the Minister for Tertiary Education was removed from that portfolio; Anne Tolley was taken out of that portfolio and replaced by Steven Joyce. Steven Joyce went on to say just last weekend in the Christchurch Press newspaper that the student loans policy was in his sights. What are we meant to take from that? I ask whether we are to assume that he is also inclined to make student loans harder to get, thereby limiting access to our tertiary institutions and limiting people\u2019s ability to take up educational opportunities, and reducing the cost of tertiary education to the Crown. We on this side of the House say that the cost is justified, and that investment ought to be made by the Government and increased in line with other comparable nations as a way of promoting economic growth and development, and as a way of securing our future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EOn top of that, the Government decided to support at its first reading the voluntary student membership bill, which was drawn out of the ballot and is Sir Roger Douglas\u2019 member\u2019s bill. That was an antagonistic gesture, as well. The Government will not say whether it will support that bill at its second reading. It will support the bill at its first reading, but it could have stymied it in its tracks, as it has done with other bills that have been drawn out of the ballot and not been given the privilege of being referred to a select committee. This Minister now has to field a bill in that context. Perhaps people are wondering why we have been getting so agitated about a bill that would not normally cause this much fuss. It is because it is being dropped into an environment that is now explosive for students. Students around the country have launched a website in response to the voluntary student membership bill. It is called Save our Services, and they are getting support in the process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI will say a couple of other things, particularly about whether this Government intends to make it harder to access student loans\u2014access that this bill expands. If that is the case, then let it say so. If it is the case that the Government wants to make it harder by virtue of ramping up the NCEA qualifications required to get into university, then that is one issue. If it wants to make it harder to access student loans by ramping up the requirements to pass while at university, w\u0101nanga, or polytech, then that is another issue. But let us be very clear that whichever way the Government goes about it, there will be people who will miss out. I will cite two examples of people who accessed education after the age of 20 or who accessed education not in the usual way of progressing from school, and I will demonstrate how important access to education is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe first example is the chief executive officer of the Universal College of Learning, Paul McElroy, who is now in the position of having to turn students away because this Government will not renegotiate the student caps and it will not invest in additional student places in order to equip our country adequately for the future. That breaks his heart because of his own background. He said that he knows firsthand about second-chance education, because as a teenager he ran away from home without university entry qualifications. His life was transformed when Wellington Polytechnic took a chance on him. It took a chance on him. He did not come in through having UE or any kind of entry qualification, but the polytechnic in Wellington at that time took a chance on him, and it changed his life. If this Government is proposing that National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) qualifications be made more difficult or that the threshold be raised so it is more difficult for people to enter tertiary education, then members should look at Mr McElroy, who has now gone on to be the chief executive officer of a polytechnic. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThe second person I will cite is somebody who came to New Zealand at the age of 23 years as a young mother. In fact, she needed to do something to improve herself and her prospects. She enrolled in education at Massey University, and in her first year she passed all her courses. It took her 4 years to complete her BA, and she was awarded a Massey scholarship as a top graduate in psychology. Later, after a series of courses and scholarships, having benefited from open entry after 20 years of age, she graduated with her PhD. The rest is a matter of public record: a lectureship at Massey University, a promotion, a move to Canterbury University, 6 years as a member of Parliament, and now 8 years of running her own research company. That person is, of course, Liz Gordon. Those are examples of people who have contributed to this country by virtue of accessing tertiary education. If this Government wishes to inhibit that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8ceac3f7f61460f9dc20a5303b9caab\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry but the member\u2019s time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022 data-id=\u00224834a6a2a7294a3a9c872895b8aea810\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224834a6a2a7294a3a9c872895b8aea810\u0022\u003ECOLIN KING (National\u2014Kaik\u014Dura):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to speak on the third reading of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. It is very easy to look at the student loan situation in isolation. From listening to Opposition members, one would imagine that it was an enormous part of the overall context of things. I think that during this third reading it would be appropriate to give the wider context of the student loan situation as it relates to exemptions and miscellaneous provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThe scheme\u2019s nominal value is $10.3 billion. According to the last financial report, the basic value of the student loan scheme is $6.5 billion. If members look at the situation in 1994, when the student loan scheme was put in place, they will see that only 252,000 people were accessing tertiary education loans. Today that number is approaching half a million. Even though collectively we might have our varying views on the scheme, this country has gone from having one of the very lowest rates of entry into tertiary study to having one of the very highest. That is laudable and applaudable. I say that is well done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThis bill in its context recognises the fact that education is portable and valuable, but we do not want to forget that the taxpayer is still picking up 70 percent of the cost of tertiary education. Half a million people have student loans. The desire of the bill is make sure that the student loan scheme functions as it is intended to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EPrincipally, the bill refines the process for two particular groups. Those two particular groups have been spoken about regularly in the House this afternoon. One group is those countries that are included in the Realm of New Zealand\u2014principally, Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, and the Ross Dependency. The second group is affected by an anomaly that the Minister of Revenue has brought to the House for speedy remedy. It relates to people who have gone on to an institution overseas to undertake a course of study above level 7 that is not available in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EI will not go on too much further. I think matters have been well and truly canvassed. This bill will greatly aid the running of the student loan scheme, and I am sure that the Minister will feel more comfortable when it is passed in a speedy and responsible way. From that point of view, it gives me great pleasure to commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022 data-id=\u002217a9a4ac0cc84e64bfede1d6aaa58bd0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002217a9a4ac0cc84e64bfede1d6aaa58bd0\u0022\u003EKELVIN DAVIS (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill amends the Student Loan Scheme Act 1992 by extending interest-free loans to borrowers who are present in Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, or the Ross Dependency for 183 or more consecutive days, in order to encourage borrowers from those countries or that territory to return to their country and contribute to its development. It also covers students who enrol with a New Zealand education provider and engage in full-time study overseas under either a formal exchange programme approved by the New Zealand Government, or a formal agreement between a New Zealand tertiary provider and an overseas tertiary provider. The bill also makes eight minor or technical amendments to the principal Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EAs has been mentioned numerous times, this is largely a technical bill, but that does not diminish its significance for those whom it affects. They are the students who have taken up interest-free student loans in order to support their decision to better themselves personally and professionally. It is a big call to choose to study. It involves time, money, and opportunity costs. I say, make no bones about it, the decision to study is the right decision for many young and old New Zealanders to make, and New Zealand benefits through having an educated, highly skilled workforce. That is why I say the interest-free student loan programme is one of the most progressive pieces of economic development legislation passed in this House. It helps to drive New Zealand\u2019s economic development. An educated workforce is imperative in this day and age, as we will never compete\u2014nor do we want to\u2014with low-wage economies. That is why I am astounded that the National Government is making noises about cutting the scheme. How will the 75 percent of people who earn under $40,000 per year be able to afford to send their children to university and polytech, when they can barely afford to pay their power bills? They cannot, and that is why access to the funds those students need in order to further themselves is so important. In fact, it is vital. Education needs to be accessible to all Kiwis who wish to access it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EWhy did the Prime Minister say recently he would take a careful look at the policy settings around student support? Why did Louise Upston, in her second reading speech, spend a few minutes telling members about how expensive the student loan scheme is for New Zealand taxpayers? Society bears this cost in the knowledge that the benefits to the country and to communities far outweigh those costs. Why did Amy Adams stand up to talk about the tax debt relating to student loans? I will tell the House why. It is because National is priming the public for the removal of interest-free student loans. Steven Joyce has told the Weekend Press that the student loan policy is in his sights. The Government\u2019s intention is clearly to make it more difficult for tertiary students to get a loan to cover their fees in the first place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EIf the Government starts to pick winners in the tertiary education system before people enrol, then those who have not done well at school for a variety of reasons, and who want to have a second chance at learning, should beware. I have a friend who is a doctor, and she said that when Labour introduced the interest-free student loan legislation it removed a weight from around her neck, as she was struggling to pay even the interest on her loan and was beginning to conclude that a move offshore was the only way to kill off her debt. She is now working at Wellington Regional Hospital, and she sees light at the end of the tunnel. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EI will go back to the Prime Minister\u2019s comments about taking a careful look at the policy settings around student support. What does he mean? The Government will make access to student loans and allowances more difficult. I suspect it will make tertiary education opportunities in universities and polytechs available for the few, not the many. Once again, legislating for the few at the expense of the many is simply not fair, and it takes away the aspirations that Labour works to foster in our communities. The Prime Minister referred to students who do not take their studies seriously, or who do not get a job quickly after qualifying. Who will determine which students those ones are, especially when there are students who go to a university or polytech and then find that the first course of study that they take is not exactly what they want? They can find that out only by going to university in the first place. As I said earlier on in the day, my brother was one of those students. He initially took business studies when he went to Waikato University, only to find that was not right for him. He then went on to get a BA in M\u0101ori, then after that he decided that a degree in law was what he after. He is now a very successful lawyer up north. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EWill student support stop after students graduate with a degree, preventing them from choosing to do postgraduate study? What about the students who need more support to succeed, because they have started further back from the starting line than others? I refer to many M\u0101ori students, whom I have seen go through the schools I have been involved with, who take time, who do not succeed to the same extent initially as many other students, but who have the ability to go on to university. The problem is just that they start from a little further back than other students, especially financially. Most of the family and friends I know from up north are not financially well off, so it is a lot harder for young people to make the decision to head off to university, knowing that that will be a big strain on their family and on finances. A number of those family members and friends who go to university do really well in the first year, but they find that the financial struggle for their families is too much to bear and many tend to drop out. That is supported by the research of the Starpath project, based at the University of Auckland. We all know students who work at their studies and at part-time paid work, often for low wages, and who struggle to make ends meet. Setting out criteria for discontinuing student loans or allowances is dangerous and elitist territory. Again, I say it is about providing more of the same for the few, at the expense of the many. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EJohn Key is threatening students, who put up with a low income now so they can study and contribute to the country\u2019s well-being in the future. Right now it looks as though he will punish them for doing that, but first he will hit them with a higher rate of GST, just to make things even harder. What will happen if there are not enough jobs for graduates to go into? What about the redundant workers who want to enrol in courses in order to improve their skills, and who need allowances and loans to do that? What about students with disabilities who find it difficult to get employment, so continue to study in order to improve their quality of life? Over 45,000 Kiwi 15 to 19-year-olds are now unemployed; that is over 12,000 more than for the same period a year ago. That number increases to over 72,000 Kiwis once we include those aged 20 to 24. The danger now is that many of these young people will stay jobless for a long period of time, as the National Government takes away the opportunity for them to aspire to better themselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThere is also the veiled threat of lifting the cap on the fees that institutions can charge students, contained in Mr Key\u2019s reference to \u201Can inflexible and bureaucratic funding and policy framework\u201D. It looks as though tertiary education will soon become the sole domain of the rich, but New Zealand\u2019s crying need is for the upskilling of the many, not the few. If Mr Key wants to see a step change in the New Zealand economy, where does he think it will come from, if not from post-compulsory education and training? He should be nurturing and investing in it, not threatening it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThe fact is that National, in its short time in office, has already proven it is no supporter of students. Here are just two examples of that. Firstly, the Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics of New Zealand revealed that about 6,000 aspiring students could be turned away from polytechnics as a result of the Government\u2019s refusal to waive financial penalties if polytechs exceed their enrolment caps. This is another short-sighted decision by the Government, which clearly prefers to see people being stuck on the dole rather than engaged in the study and training required to ensure we emerge from the recession with a work-ready and productive workforce. Secondly, the Government has passed legislation that reduced the number of seats on polytech councils from a maximum of 20 to just eight. The legislation allows the Minister to appoint nominees to half the council positions. Requirements that M\u0101ori, staff, students, and the community must have a representative on polytech councils have been cut. This will enable the Government to take a much more dominant role and, disappointingly, will remove the existing provisions for almost all student, community, and academic staff representatives to sit on the councils.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022 data-id=\u00220577d328e27f4929919acd6e58b1c607\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220577d328e27f4929919acd6e58b1c607\u0022\u003ECATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koutou katoa. The Green Party will be voting against the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. As the only party opposing it at the third reading, I think it is important that we try to explain to others the reasons, rationale, and analysis behind that decision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EFirstly, I acknowledge what Kelvin Davis just said about unintended consequences, although he did not refer to it like that; he talked about recent education bills. The Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill is a good example. We were lobbied only yesterday by the New Zealand Union of Students\u2019 Associations about the consequences of that bill in terms of reducing the number of students who anecdotally are not getting elected to the new polytech councils. Obviously the jury is still out and the elections are not all over, but already we can see the effects of that bill, and that more and more students are reporting back to that organisation that their campuses have no students on their councils. That is why we take a very precautionary view on any legislation that impacts on students, because we believe that we must take the big picture into account. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EWe are voting against this bill because of our consistent belief that despite the positive technical tinkering in parts of the bill, and the good intentions within the narrow definitions of the bill, the original student loan scheme itself remains one of the most oppressive pieces of legislation in the history of this House. It cannot compete with some of the mean-spirited colonising laws from our history, such as the Maori Prisoners Act or the Tohunga Suppression Act, but elements of this bill fit well with the retrogressive punitive pieces of law that have been selected recently from the ballot, such as the Minimum Wage (Mitigation of Youth Unemployment) Amendment Bill and the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill. We are talking about punishing people who are already in debt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThe student loan scheme was designed to make education a commodity and individuals responsible for the costs. Now the country has a $10 billion student debt, which is absolutely no surprise to anybody. The scheme has worked to silence collective student political power and to stop people from even objecting to it because they are too busy paying for it. It has led to a generation of people who believe that the common good is a fairytale, and that being in serious debt is the normal financial status of a young person. The idea of health and education being available for minimal cost is a foreign language to most young people. So big ups to the free-marketeers, who have achieved their goal. No one saw it coming. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003ECoincidentally, or perhaps conveniently, the global free market has promoted credit to young people and their right to new clothes and cheap travel, all paid for on the plastic. Many middle-class younger people would feel deprived if they had to dress out of op shops and sleep on mattresses on the floor, which was the norm in my student days. They have been sold materialism as a reward for debt. Other speakers have referred to many who are struggling to survive as students or are too intimidated even to start. That is why we look at the bigger picture in terms of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EMany students have been persuaded to borrow against their future freedom to build a life beyond working to pay back that debt. However, it is now 2010 and the headless chickens who failed to stop the student loan scheme in the 1980s have sewn their heads back on and started to deconstruct what happened to tertiary education. Many of us have figured out that the credit and debt cycle distorts the opportunities of young people and gives them a burden that has been so normalised that they cannot really believe it when my generation talks about paying $150 a year for university fees and books. If members believe that the quality of what students are paying for is so much better than our free education, they cannot have been in a tertiary institution lately. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EOur children and older learners do not need an increase in the repayment rate of their loans, especially if those children or older learners are already unable to pay. That is why we stand alone against this bill. It is a popular tactic to make the broke pay more. In this brave new world, anyone who can pay up front is automatically privileged, be it a parking ticket, a dog licence, or a university education. If you can pay now you are automatically better off.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022293482949b9f48e1a5d9ed17f06b69d8\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member is bringing the Chair into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad2af29977c448e89437be8a16e30b8f\u0022\u003ECATHERINE DELAHUNTY\u003C/span\u003E: I beg your pardon, Mr Deputy Speaker\u2014a person is automatically better off. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003ESo the Green Party rejects new section 20A(2)(a) in clause 7, which allows for a 15c in the dollar repayment fee to be taken from a person\u2019s wages if that person is a late payer of his or her student loan. That provision alone undoes all the positives in this bill that we would very much like to support. It does not feel great to vote against the common-sense parts of the bill, but we clearly need to uphold the principles that few other parties even bother to mention any more. Those principles are that education is a human right and that our young people are taonga to be nurtured rather than an economic resource to be captured. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EIf we are to start the work of restoring social equity and building a fair society we have to include the student loan scheme and the broader economic context, especially when 72,000 young people are out of work or out of training. We have to listen to the stories and struggles of \u201CGeneration Debt\u201D. We have to assess in every single bill before this House the quality of the so-called commodity we are selling at this price. We must do that assessment. Does the bill help students and people who are no longer students and have families to support to do better? In what context is this bill being proposed? The debates are raging outside this House about access to education. Despite all the Government\u2019s rhetoric about education, there are worrying signals. Student organisations are telling the Green Party that that even if we save the interest-free aspect of the loan scheme, entry levels and additional-year entry levels are under threat and fee caps are under threat, and there is now even a suggestion that the Government may be dropping the open entry to university at the age of 20. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EWe cannot ignore the signals or the context in which we are operating. It is not paranoid to ask where we go from here. In considering any changes to things like open entry at age 20, there are many, many stories. We heard the story of Dr Liz Gordon, who was a chair of the Education and Science Committee, as one example of someone who went to university aged 20. I have family members who did the same thing. Many of us were wayward adolescents who did not know what we wanted to do, and we left school despite our parents\u2019 concerns. Many of us returned to education older and wiser, and because of open entry we were able to access education and do well with it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EWe are very concerned about where the whole picture is going. We oppose the changes in this bill because we are very nervous that they add to the burden, and we do not support the increase in repayments to 15c in the dollar for people who are already behind. We are watching the changes in the weather in the student loan policy arena, and it is certainly getting rough. Followers of the political machinations and the student loan scheme will notice the role of the Green Party and the \u201Ccareful look\u201D, to quote the Prime Minister, that we will take at any changes to the student loan scheme in terms of who will benefit and who will pay more. We stand here to be consistent about the bad parts of this bill and to vote against it because of our consistent advocacy for the vulnerable and the marginalised, instead of the people who already have their wealth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022 data-id=\u00220c10a697a9a940c2973eb58fd07e2cc7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220c10a697a9a940c2973eb58fd07e2cc7\u0022\u003ETODD McCLAY (National\u2014Rotorua):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to speak in the third reading of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. The National Government is committed to having in place a student loan scheme that is balanced, and at the same time to putting in place incentives for people to pay off their loans more quickly. More than half a million New Zealanders have a student loan, and many of those New Zealanders have made long-term financial decisions on the basis of current interest-free student loan policy. We want to ensure that they can plan with certainty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EThrough this bill the National Government has fulfilled its commitment, made during the election campaign, to keep interest-free student loans for tertiary students. I support this bill fully. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022 data-id=\u0022ca0df0cac3a14308b842ee9e8665e4fb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ca0df0cac3a14308b842ee9e8665e4fb\u0022\u003EHONE HARAWIRA (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tokerau):\u003C/span\u003E Kia ora, Mr Deputy Speaker. The American poet, Robert Frost, once said about the privilege of a higher education that education that does not change life much, it just lifts trouble to a higher plain of regard. That is a cynical view, perhaps, but it is one that is no doubt shared by heaps of tertiary students here in Aotearoa. Although people prattle on about broadening horizons and the intellectual challenges of undergraduate and postgraduate education, the fact is that the issues that really matter for students are simple ones: access and affordability. Can they get in, and can they afford to stay there? The M\u0101ori Party believes that a good tertiary education is an investment in our country\u2019s future, that it should be freely available to all, and that students should get an allowance that is set at the same level as the unemployment benefit. We are a long way away from that point at the moment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EThe Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill raises the issue of eligibility. It allows students who live mainly in their homelands of Niue, the Cooks, and Tokelau to get interest-free student loans while they are here as a way of encouraging them to go back and help development in their homelands after they get their degrees. That is a notion that fits well with our kaupapa of supporting our whanaunga right across the Pacific to feel free to come here to gain the skills they require to help build their nations. Secondly, the bill enables students who are enrolled with a New Zealand institution, and who are on approved overseas study, to also access interest-free loans. That is welcomed by the New Zealand Vice-Chancellors Committee because it recognises the internationalisation of tertiary education and reflects the increasingly international nature of a great deal of university research. Both areas, of course, will increase the number of students who can get interest-free loans, which is a good thing in itself. Given the importance of tertiary education to our economy, that will, no doubt, receive support from right across the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EAnother reason the M\u0101ori Party supports this bill is that Te Mana \u0100konga itself welcomes the commitment to look at increasing the income threshold for those getting a student loan, as well as the decision to shift the interest-rate mechanism from regulations to the Act, making it more transparent to understand and easier to monitor. The M\u0101ori Party still raises its concerns about the philosophy of user-pays continuing to dominate our thinking about tertiary education, when we should be more focused on investing and keeping our students here. We are concerned about the deplorable state of secondary education, which sees too many M\u0101ori students still leaving school without even the necessary qualifications for tertiary education, and about the cuts in funding for adult education and second-chance learning, which makes those inequalities even greater. But in the interests of opening up the tertiary sector to a greater number of students, we will be supporting this bill. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u00228ecf8eddd77248ce9724ae09bf3eea98\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ecf8eddd77248ce9724ae09bf3eea98\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\u003C/span\u003E I rise in support of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill in the third reading. This bill is another example of great work done in the parliamentary process so that the outcome from the select committee process is that the majority of the parties in the House support the legislation, with the exception of the Green Party. I must add, though, for the benefit of people watching the debate, that Labour supports the bill. People who have heard some of the comments from the Labour side of the House would, I think, be quite surprised to realise that it is voting for the bill. I think it is important that when people listen to these speeches, they do have a clear view of who is voting for the bill, and Labour voted for this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003ELabour members got distracted by some other stuff, but I think that the important point to notice is that we all recognise that tertiary education is a vital part of growing our economy and our country. As Hone Harawira from the M\u0101ori Party has just said, tertiary education is an investment in our future, and in this particular instance the Government is again delivering a brighter future for all New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003ELet us have a quick look at some of the numbers. The number of tertiary students as at July 2008 was approximately 460,000. Of that 460,000, 178,000 have student loans. The average student loan with the Inland Revenue Department as at 30 June last year was $16,213. The average time taken to pay off a student loan, according to the student loan scheme annual report of October last year, for students who left study in 1999, appears to be about 8 years. So in effect what we are doing with this legislation is making some improvements to the student loan scheme. There is nothing significant to it. It is basically looking at how we can improve what is already in place, recognising the importance of tertiary education to our economy and to our future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EIn terms of the conversations we have had about the value of the debt, I want to reinforce the points we made earlier. The sum of $10.3 billion is a lot of money, in anyone\u2019s book. So it is important that that debt is managed well and that we are able to look at improvements to the student loan scheme, and that we make sure that that Crown asset of $10.3 billion is managed in an efficient and consistent manner.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThe other side of the Chamber has thrown some comments around, trying to do its usual tactic of scaremongering and going way off the topic in terms of this student loan bill, which has just some technical changes and improvements. I want to reiterate what the points were, because for those listening to some of the Labour members they probably have not realised exactly what this bill does. First of all, it extends the interest-free loan to two special groups in recognition of the high value of tertiary education in building a strong economy. It extends interest-free loans to borrowers who live in countries that are part of the realm of New Zealand. An important part of its improvements is to extend the interest-free loans to students who are furthering their education overseas. So, for example, if they are studying a course of a very technical or specialised nature that is not available in New Zealand they are able to still access the student loan through that process. There are a few technical and remedial changes to the bill, which I will not repeat, given that they have been discussed at length. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThis bill will ensure that the student loan scheme continues to function as intended. It improves the student loan scheme. That is why I am proud to support this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u002267cb63e56ed440968abcc31ef535fe1f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002267cb63e56ed440968abcc31ef535fe1f\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak on the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I go back to something that Louise Upston, the member on the other side of the House, just said. She pointed out that she feels that members on this side of the House have gone way off the topic of the bill and in respect of the issues we have at hand. I think it is really important to note that this side of the House looks at these issues broadly in respect of public statements that have been made by the Government and past actions in tertiary education. We do not take just a narrow view when looking at legislation, like that side of the House. I thought that was a really important point to make before I get into what I would like to discuss about this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThis bill is largely technical, and Labour will support it. We agree with some things in this bill. We agree with them to such an extent that we actually support this bill. I want to discuss those things, but I will also discuss during this speech some of the concerns that we have with the direction that the Government is taking this country, with the actions it has already exercised, and with some of the statements its members have made about tertiary education. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EOne of the main things this bill does is amend the Student Loan Scheme Act 1992 by extending interest-free student loans to borrowers who are present in Niue, Cook Islands, Tokelau, or the Ross Dependency for 183 or more consecutive days in order to encourage borrowers from those countries or that territory to return to their countries and contribute to their development. We on this side of the House support that amendment. We think it is very important that our Pacific people from the territories of New Zealand have the opportunity to return to their homelands if they wish, in order to contribute to the social and the economic development of those countries, particularly Niue, Tokelau, and the Cook Islands. It has been mentioned that the population of the Ross Dependency is probably very small and we are probably talking about scientists wanting to come here to train rather than a population of people. We support that amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003ESome issues arose during the Committee stage, and I have to say that the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Revenue, responded well to some of the questions that came up. One of them was on what mechanisms the Government might put in place to ensure that those who return to their territories have the mechanisms to pay back those student loans. I think the Minister addressed those concerns. There are still a few concerns. One that I was thinking about, but did not get the chance to discuss in full during the Committee stage on Part 1 of the bill, was about the Tokelauans. I was thinking of the large number of Tokelauans who work as public servants and who are based in Samoa for long periods of time. We know that Tokelau is very difficult to access. In terms of the public service that Tokelauans have, many of their workers are based in Samoa. So I wondered about the provision in the bill that states that students cannot be outside of New Zealand or any of the territory countries for more than 31 days. Samoa is not one of our territory countries, and that could affect Tokelauans down the track. I guess that issue will need to be discussed at a later date. We support that aspect of the bill, and we commend the Minister for putting it forward. We support it wholeheartedly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWe are concerned about not necessarily the aspects of this bill, but the general direction that the Government is taking tertiary education in this country. We have been disturbed by the lack of attention the National Government has paid to tertiary education. In our minds on this side of the House it would have made absolute sense to invest and to put a focus on tertiary education given the recession, and given the high levels of unemployment in this country. Instead, we saw, as Maurice Williamson likes to refer to, a slash-and-burn mentality. We saw cuts to adult and community education; we saw in a concerning way statements put out by the Prime Minister and the Minister for Tertiary Education that student loans will be looked at more closely. A number of other things have been very disturbing to this side of the House, and we are watching very closely. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWith regard to what is happening in this bill, the irony is that we on this side of the House know that National does not believe in interest-free student loans. We know that in 2005, when the Labour Government introduced interest-free loans, the attitude of members opposite, including the current Prime Minister\u2014who was National\u2019s spokesperson on finance at the time, I believe\u2014was that it was corrupt and it was irresponsible of the Labour Government to do it. I am sure that all those thousands of students out there would disagree with the opinions of the spokesperson on finance at the time and the Prime Minister now, John Key, on making student loans interest-free. For those of us who\u2014and this has been discussed broadly across the debate, as well\u2014have had to access student loans, the fact that interest was taken off those student loans and we were not charged interest along the way was a relief to us. It was an issue for those of us who were out working. All we saw every 2 months\u2014or whenever it was when we got the statements\u2014was increasing interest and very little paid off, despite the fact that money was coming out of our pay weekly or fortnightly. We have to commend the previous Labour Government for that change; we need to remind the National Government of it. Government members fundamentally do not believe in interest-free student loans. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThis weekend just gone we heard Steven Joyce admit that it was a political call to endorse the interest-free student loan policy in 2008. The members opposite know that if they had made any changes they would have had big trouble with support moving forward. Last year they started to soften the ground for the removal of interest-free student loans with the introduction of the Student Loan Scheme (Repayment Bonus) Amendment Bill. The 10 percent top-up scheme favours high earners, who can afford voluntary repayments, although they might game the system and decide to invest their spare cash elsewhere and keep the interest-free loans. They are doubly advantaged, as the Government assists them to game the system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThe Prime Minister recently said the Government was going to take a careful look at the policy settings around student support. In our minds the question we straight away think of is what that means. Will the Government make access to student loans and allowances harder? Will it make tertiary education opportunities in universities and polytechs available for the few and not the many? I guess it goes back to what Hone Harawira said when he spoke on this bill: at the end of the day it comes down to access and affordability. We on this side of the House are definitely concerned with those things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EJohn Key has referred to students who do not take their studies seriously and who do not get a job quickly after qualifying. Who will determine who those students are? It has been discussed across the course of this debate that, unfortunately, the research shows that M\u0101ori and Pacific students take longer to complete their degrees. As I have discussed earlier, and as other people have also said, it is not due to lesser intelligence; for many, it comes down to their having come from backgrounds where university education, or higher-level tertiary education, has not been the norm in the family. Many of them are going through university\u2014and I know this from having worked with many M\u0101ori and Pacific students\u2014as the first in their families to undertake university study. It is a very foreign environment for many of our students who are going through. Why should they be the ones\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022187e4099-cc16-4bb8-8379-82c881af1724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223286a62dd5774d0d8944f86a94fa42cf\u0022\u003EDavid Garrett\u003C/span\u003E: Same speech\u2014heard this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abf2003639ba4f68b37a695ceecd329c\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014I ask Mr Garrett, who I know disagrees with everything I am saying\u2014who have their lives placed in jeopardy, and who have their futures put at risk because this Government does not understand the need to make sure that tertiary education is kept affordable and accessible for a wide range of people, not just for those who have the money to pay for tertiary education? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThose are some of the concerns that have been raised. Labour members support this bill, but it brings to light some of the wider issues we have with the tertiary education system, and with the direction that this Government is taking it. In light of the high levels of unemployment, particularly for our youth\u2014and particularly for our M\u0101ori and Pacific youth, where the unemployment rate is sitting at around 30 percent\u2014it is very important that the Government takes tertiary education seriously. It is important that alongside creating jobs for this country and for those groups of people, the Government is also providing quality tertiary educational opportunities. Thank you very much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u00220e8920675a7248e7a4380a951843487a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220e8920675a7248e7a4380a951843487a\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (National\u2014Rangitata):\u003C/span\u003E This debate on the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill has been really revealing. What a load of drivel we have had to listen to, at times. I will take a few moments to address some of the concerns that have been raised. We have heard in this House this afternoon concerns that students are having to buy their clothes at op shops. Well, that raised for me some really serious questions. I believe that students have an understanding of the cost of their education, their tertiary education, to this country. They certainly understand how much it is costing them, and in many cases costing their parents, as well. I can think of some really good examples of young people who in fact are very happy to go and get fantastic bargains from op shops or second-hand clothes shops. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EIn fact, I have a story from close to home, a story about a retro party that is happening tonight in Dunedin, at Otago University. My daughter has purchased a bright orange frock from an op shop, and she is adding that to her bright yellow shoes\u2014so she tells me\u2014and the wonderful pink tights I sent her away from home with. So there we go; what is wrong with young people understanding how to get a bargain? In fact, their tertiary education is a bargain, because, roughly speaking, they are being asked to contribute to about only a quarter of the cost. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003ESpeaking of bargains, I have a story of my own. Prior to becoming an MP, I was walking along an Auckland street and I spotted a gorgeous jacket in a second-hand shop. I thought \u201CMy goodness, I will just see if that fits me.\u201D It was a lovely jacket. I purchased the jacket, wore it for quite some time\u2014again, prior to getting into Parliament\u2014and one day I saw a photograph of a very famous person wearing that very same jacket. It crossed my mind: \u201COh, my gosh, did Helen Clark own that jacket before me?\u201D. Maybe! Who knows? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EAnyway, we know that young people attending universities and polytechnics who have student loans have to learn how to budget. They have to learn the value of money. Hopefully, at the same time, they are getting an excellent tertiary education. But this bill is simply about maximising the benefit of the Crown\u2019s $10.3 billion asset in student loans, because, really, we\u2014and I confess I include myself\u2014have been getting a little bit off-track. We have also heard suggestions that back in 2005 there were words that revealed that National at the time was not keen on Labour\u2019s student loan policy. But hang on a minute! Times change. What we have now is a $10.3 billion investment. Let me repeat: National\u2019s commitment is to having in place a student loan scheme that is balanced, while at the same time putting in place incentives for people to pay off their loans more quickly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EFor young people to get out of debt more quickly, what can possibly be wrong with those sorts of levers? What can possibly be wrong with a fresh-eyed National Government looking at the student loan scheme and finding ways of improving it with the mechanisms used by the Inland Revenue Department, finding ways of improving it for those who are studying overseas, and finding ways of improving it so that it continues to function as the student loan scheme was intended to? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003ENational is absolutely committed to the importance of tertiary education to build a strong economy, but at the same time there are settings all around that that we have to make sure are correct. That is why the Hon Peter Dunne has brought this bill to the House, why we are passing it now, and why, before very much longer\u2014in fact, just shortly after the House meets again\u2014it will be enacted on 1 April. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EI reiterate National\u2019s absolute commitment to having a fresh look at legislation, a fresh look that, I have heard, has meant that Ministers are competing against each other because they have so many bills they want to bring to the House, in order to make New Zealand a much more productive economy and a better place to live in, in the hope that our tertiary-educated students will continue to live here and be productive people in our economy. I am certainly looking forward to that, and hoping that it means that our three daughters will get that message, stay here in New Zealand, and bring up their children close to me. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022 data-id=\u002209c976e4d3144f6e9cb894d2fa9ad0de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002209c976e4d3144f6e9cb894d2fa9ad0de\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS (Labour\u2014Rimutaka):\u003C/span\u003E I listened quite carefully to that contribution on the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill from National member Jo Goodhew. I thought that what was quite revealing was not so much what she said but what she did not say. At no point did she commit National to retaining the interest-free student loan scheme beyond the end of this term. She responded to a lot of the points that Labour members had made, but at no point did she deny that some time in the future National wants to do away with interest-free student loans. It would not at all surprise me if that is what National wants to do, because it was so vocal in opposing the interest-free student loan policy when it was first introduced. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI will go back and respond to some of the comments that have been made. The debate in this third reading has ranged reasonably widely. I think that that is probably because, in the nature of urgency, we have canvassed a lot of the specific material of the bill already today. Members have talked a lot about the value of tertiary education as an investment in the future of our country, and I echo some of the comments raised by members\u2014particularly by those on this side of the House, but even by some of the members on the other side of the House, as well. We cannot view investment in tertiary education narrowly and only in economic terms; we have to look at the investment we make in all forms of education, including tertiary education, as an investment in the development of New Zealand society. Not all of that investment will necessarily lead directly to an improved economic return. But, overall, if we build the level of social capital within New Zealand by having a more educated society, then in turn the effects of that will flow on to a more economically prosperous country\u2014one with a higher standard of living, higher wages, fewer long-term health problems, and so forth. So we have to look at the investments that we make in education, including through the student loan scheme, with that very broad picture in mind. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EWith that in mind, I tell the House that there has been some fairly recent research. I have just been reading a book called The Spirit Level, which talks about the fact that countries that are more even\u2014where there are higher levels of education, and where the gap between the rich and the poor is lower\u2014generally tend to have far fewer other problems than other countries. They have lower crime rates, longer life expectancy, fewer health problems, and so forth. So investing in education, including tertiary education, is an important part of making sure we increase our social capital and decrease some of those wider social problems. The student loan scheme provides a step on the ladder into tertiary education for those who otherwise could not afford it. It is a fairly recent initiative; it extends back only as far as about 1992. Of course, we would not have the student loan scheme had National honoured the pre-election promise it made in 1990 to abolish all student tuition fees so that tertiary education would return to being free. Of course, that is what many of the members in this House received when they undertook tertiary study. They received their tertiary education for free, and a lot of them received some form of allowance during the time they were studying. Some of them may have been bonded during that time. I know that one of my parents received a tertiary education paid for by the State and was bonded as a teacher, as a result. There is a whole generation of New Zealanders who benefited from policies such as those, which have been taken away from the several generations that have followed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI note that one of the reasons the student loan scheme was established was to make sure that, despite the increased cost of tertiary education, people can still access it. They are not excluded on the basis of cost. Having said that, I say that it is not the ideal mechanism. I, for one, hold out hope that one day we will return to a situation where tertiary education is far more accessible and the costs are not as prohibitive as they are now. I appreciate the economic realities of that; it will not happen overnight. I acknowledge that back in 1999, when the Labour Government was elected, we were not suddenly going to revert to the days when tertiary education was completely free. That is why, over time, I was very supportive of the initiatives that the previous Labour Government put in place to progressively lower the cost of participating in tertiary education. It began in the early days with the cap on student tuition fees, so that they did not continue to grow to the massive extent they grew in the decade prior. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EThere were other things, such as the abolition of interest on student loans while a student was studying. When I first entered tertiary study, one of the most frustrating things about the student loan scheme was that during the time I was studying I was accumulating interest on my loan, despite not earning anything and not having any ability to make any repayments. All of the money that I was earning through my part-time job\u2014stacking bread for Quality Bakers\u2014I was putting into reducing the amount of money that I needed to borrow in the first place. I was not making any student loan repayments, and in the meantime the interest was accumulating. When the Labour Government came in, in 1999, it put an end to that. I think that was a very welcome initiative, although it took another 6 years before the Government was finally in a position to do away with interest on student loans altogether. As somebody who was involved in the development of that policy, I can say that I am particularly proud of that. I know the huge impact that that has had on the repayment times for some of our student loan borrowers. When talking about discouraging people from leaving New Zealand\u2014we want them to stay in New Zealand\u2014 we understand anecdotally that one of the things that drove people away was the huge, mounting student loan debts they had by the time they had finished studying. Removing the interest on their student loans if they stayed in New Zealand provided an incentive for them to stay here, contribute to the New Zealand economy, to our country, and to our society, and get rid of their student loans. I think that was a very, very good thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EThere were many other things in the overall mix, such as the Step Up Scholarships. Stepping up is a term that seems to have been adopted by members on the other side of the House these days, but it was the last Labour Government that introduced Step Up Scholarships to make getting into tertiary education a little bit easier for some people who had previously been disadvantaged. It should be noted, of course, that all of the initiatives that I have just talked about were opposed by the then National Opposition, and quite vocally so, as well. National opposed all of those initiatives. We have well and truly canvassed John Key\u2019s pledge to fight the introduction of interest-free student loans with every bone in his body.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5cc7f576fd5415992ea6387c17cae51\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225face07ed0f84a8ba7f0b77e78f205e8\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. He pledged he would fight it with every bone in his body. Here we are, a year and a bit into a National Government, and interest-free student loans are still there. He pledged to fight it with every bone in his body, so one can only conclude that he does not have any spine left, as my colleague Moana Mackey said. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003ENational members have clearly demonstrated during their time in office that they do not have a lot of time for tertiary students. They are quite intent on cutting a lot of things in tertiary education that lead to an increase in social capital, that help those people at the bottom end of the spectrum to get into tertiary education\u2014or into any form of education\u2014to upskill themselves, and to move on through the system. An example is the abolition of night classes. People cannot get a student loan for night classes, but they did not need one because they were relatively cheap. People did not need a student loan to get into a night class. Night classes are gone now. They were a stepping stone that led into other forms of tertiary education, but they have gone. The training incentive allowance reduced the amount that people needed to borrow when they undertook tertiary education, but that has gone. It was cut by the National Government. I turn to voluntary students association membership. If the Government cannot get the students associations on board with it, it will do away with them altogether. It is a tried and true trick from the National Government. If the Government cannot get its opponents on board, it will do everything it can to put them out of business. I think that is pretty sad. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI think this bill is a good bill. We have talked a lot about the details, and I want to thank once again the Minister in charge of the bill for his willingness to engage in the debate. I have raised several issues with him, and he has responded to me. That included a commitment on behalf of both of us to work together on one or two of those issues to see whether we can further them outside the scope of this bill, and I want to thank him for doing that. But my main concern with the bill is not so much with what is in it, because Labour supports it, but with what is not in it and what might be coming further down the track. I would be very concerned if the National Government moved away from its promise to keep the interest-free student loan scheme. That certainly seems to be what it is lining up for. John Key mentioned in his speech that the Government will be taking another look at all of the settings around student support in tertiary education. Similar comments have been made by the new Minister for Tertiary Education, Steven Joyce. I think it would be very sad if the National Government went back on its promise to retain the interest-free student loan scheme, whether the Government was going to go back on it at this election, the next election, or the one after that. I hope that the Government will maintain interest-free student loans. I think it is a very good scheme. It is one that we are very proud of; I am very proud of it. It was passed by a Labour Government, despite very vocal opposition from the then National Opposition. I would like to see the scheme stay in place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022 data-id=\u00222168af1551dd4604854bd962e763d39e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222168af1551dd4604854bd962e763d39e\u0022\u003ENICKY WAGNER (National):\u003C/span\u003E I support the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. As we have heard today in the House, it is mainly a technical bill, which includes, as everybody agrees, several useful technical amendments. It clarifies some exemptions for students living outside but within the realm of New Zealand, and for those who are studying overseas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EThe bill also makes some very sensible changes to interest payments. It has a softening of the conditions for those students who are fully repaying their loans, and an extension of relief for other students on hardship grounds. But there is also a firming up of consequences for students who have failed to make payments, failed to correct deductions, or failed to pay any due amount. For those students, the Inland Revenue Department will be allowed to increase the standard rate of repayment deductions from 10 percent to 15 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EAs we have heard in the House today, it is great that New Zealand students have the opportunity to have a student loan scheme, and it is great that it can help them to get a good tertiary education so that they have a future and a good career proposition. It is also great that the Government is joining with students to invest in their future. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022071d29021a504a00b09a97ddb18a22a6\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 113\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222f1ef00282184696a084c9b42db69c4e\u0022\u003EAnimal Welfare Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00223e5744224d8d417992dc5d7ecbeb5987\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000725\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 18 February.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022 data-id=\u002292f1d65e918f487cb7d7043ad13798e4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002292f1d65e918f487cb7d7043ad13798e4\u0022\u003ECOLIN KING (National\u2014Kaik\u014Dura):\u003C/span\u003E The Animal Welfare Amendment Bill is a very appropriate bill to be considering, because as a nation we have a huge number of animals. In actual fact, sometimes it is a bit of a joke that New Zealand is known worldwide for having far more animals than humans. We are quite pleased about that, however, because as a nation we have a primary sector economy, and that primary sector economy contributes to a first-class economy. So this bill is indeed timely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003ESadly, there is from time to time outrageous behaviour that does not do anything for New Zealand\u2019s image, and we need, then, to have a structured process of penalties in place for people who mistreat animals. That is what the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill refers to. It brings in a new regime of punishment for people who commit crimes of cruelty against animals. It is worth noting that previously the ultimate crime against an animal was wilful ill-treatment, but there were very, very few occasions when there was a guilty verdict in those cases. That was largely because it was very difficult to show that wilfulness. This bill introduces another category, of reckless ill-treatment. I think that that is very sensible, because reckless behaviour is something that can be quite predictable, and a normal person will understand it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThe bill effectively has two parts to it. There is the regime that sorts out the behaviour of reckless ill-treatment, and there is the aspect that deals with how long a person who is judged to have committed cruelty against an animal is disqualified from owning an animal. The bill also talks about the contravention of a court order that prevents somebody from having an animal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThis bill will attract a significant number of submissions, and we in the Primary Production Committee will welcome them. The committee, I believe, is ideally situated to consider the submissions. We will certainly welcome them, but we encourage those people who submit to do so within the context of the bill. I say that because we have quite a structured process within New Zealand of managing best practice. We have the common-sense behaviour of looking after pets in cities, which is looked after by the SPCA, or the Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Then we have the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, which rules and adjudges on what is considered best practice with regard to domesticated animals, like sheep, cattle, chooks, pigs, and so on. So when those submissions come in and we consider them, they will need to be in the context and the scope of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EOn the bill\u2019s first reading, the Minister stood up and said that he would like to see it reported back to the House in a timely fashion. That report back will be on 20 April. We need to consider that once we finish this session\u2014tonight or tomorrow, or whenever it is; we are still in urgency\u2014there is a 2-week adjournment. On that basis we will have to be pretty quick in getting those submissions in, because there will be, I am sure, a large public interest in this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThe regime of fines has been doubled, effectively. It might be a fair point to make that doubling a fine does not actually remedy a situation. However, I think that it does clearly lay out to the community, and to society as a whole, the value that we put on our loyal, faithful pets, and on those animals that we extract a living from. Effectively, the penalty regime is raised from $125,000 for a body corporate up to $250,000. It sounds like a lot of money, but the point that is of interest to me is that an individual can actually get a prison sentence, but a corporate body just gets a larger fine. Nobody actually comes up for trial for cruelty in the latter case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThere will be a lot of interest, as I have said, in this bill. I trust that those who are submitting on it will do so in the context of the bill, because we are looking at a regime or structure of penalties for cruelty, and on that basis alone I imagine that we will not try to get into a field where we say we should be able to do something or we should not. The debate will be about the aspects of a workable solution, because judges have been criticised for not implementing the law; I have to say that until this bill came along it was virtually impossible for them to do so, because it was so difficult to prove the wilful aspect of ill-treatment. So the introduction of a reckless ill-treatment category will greatly aid the whole process, and I am sure we will see a lot more convictions for those people who should be treated as criminals. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022 data-id=\u00224f340ae16cd7425d80d5de0d50ee3579\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224f340ae16cd7425d80d5de0d50ee3579\u0022\u003EDr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E It is my pleasure to speak in support of the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill. I first acknowledge Simon Bridges, who initially introduced this bill, which has now been adopted by the Government, to the House. I am delighted to support this bill, after all the horror stories that we have seen on television and heard about, like the killing of 33 dogs, and the kittens fed to pit bulls and filmed\u2014those terrible things that happened to pets. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003EI say at the outset that Labour members do not accept animal cruelty at all. We are totally against cruelty, not only to pets but also, as I will discuss a little later, to farm animals. As human values and perceptions of pets and their welfare change over time, we need to think about farm animals as well. In 2008, 11,000 complaints were received by the SPCA about animal cruelty. Out of those, only 110 resulted in any charges being laid. Out of those 110 cases, only 58 people were convicted. That shows either that judges or courts do not take the issue of cruelty to animals very seriously, or our values do not cause us to take the issue very seriously. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003EThis bill essentially raises fines from $50,000 to $100,000 and the term of imprisonment from 3 year to 5 years. As the previous speaker, Colin King, said, increasing the penalties will not make a heck of a lot of difference by itself. What really has to happen is for us to put some resources into the issues. For example, 20 years ago one-third of animal welfare cases were dealt with by the police, one-third by the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, and one-third by the SPCA. Now the SPCA deals with 90 percent of animal cruelty cases. The SPCA needs further resources to make sure that those cases are dealt with properly, and the Government needs to make sure that it supports the SPCA to deal with such cases. The most important thing is to put more resources into dealing with this issue\u2014for example, prosecuting those cases costs thousands of dollars. So there is a need for further resources to make sure that animal welfare is looked after. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003EThe thing that I am really concerned about is not only cruelty to pet animals; as the area of legal practices changes around the world, and the perception about animal cruelty and the treatment of animals changes around the world, we also have to think about farm animals. As I alluded to before, in recent times there has been a lot of talk about cubicle farming and also a debate about 1080, possums, and sow crates. Of course, we have been raising around the world the issue of whaling, and the public is becoming aware of all those issues. Years ago, many moons ago, when I first came to this country\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268faf5a1e87a42b38e8440229111caf4\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Many, many moons.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228072039975524ef881e23eb683e13443\u0022\u003EDr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014many moons ago\u2014thousands of lambs died in the snow in wintertime, and I wondered about the way we do farming, when thousands of young animals of 1 and 2 days old were dying in the cold. The issue was whether we were treating our animals the way they should be treated. There is some controversy about cubicle farming in Canterbury. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003EIn one generation the perceptions about animal welfare and cruelty issues have come into our consciousness. We are always now thinking about how we treat these animals\u2014and how we raise farm animals and how they should be treated. I think this is very important as pressure comes on us, particularly from overseas markets where we send our live animals. There has been an issue about live animals going for the haj. There has been an issue about that, and about the likelihood of cruelty to some of these sheep that are sent overseas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003EIn my view we need to make sure that in the future we have a more comprehensive bill for animal welfare. This amendment bill, in my view, is just part of an ongoing issue rather than a solution. There is a lot of concern from the various animal welfare movements, particularly from the countries that import our live animals. We export meat to some of those markets. The perception is changing. We have to make sure that, over time\u2014soon, I hope\u2014the Minister of Agriculture, the Minister of Justice, or whoever, brings forward a more comprehensive animal welfare bill, which will make sure that not only our pet animals but also our farm animals are properly treated, and that we fulfil the expectations that are out in the markets to which we export our animals. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003EAs even Government members accept, this bill by itself, by raising imprisonment to 5 years, will not solve the problem. I honestly say, and I am sure that my colleagues on the Primary Production Committee will agree, that this is an interim arrangement. In the longer term we need a comprehensive animal welfare bill so that we can\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249ad6339e0f34ed78a9d8902bdfd5710\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: There\u2019s nothing \u201Cinterim\u201D about a law change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221792350621ab45f4a89e7b78ff386069\u0022\u003EDr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I know it is an important issue, but I think we have to go to the next step. We have to look at other issues that deal particularly with our farm animals, because as the perceptions change in the markets, importing countries will have stringent requirements. As we know, people are now tracing where our meat comes from. Some of these green movements and other similar movements require stronger animal welfare laws and regulations, so we have to follow those. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003EIn a nutshell, I say that I support this bill wholeheartedly, and I agree with the Government and all of the parties that are supporting the bill that it is a useful interim arrangement. But in the long term we have to make sure we have a fully fledged animal welfare bill that can look into the issues concerning farm animals, as well. With those few words, I say thank you and I thank my colleagues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9c097fa6bde461a8e9e63cfa1e401f6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9c097fa6bde461a8e9e63cfa1e401f6\u0022\u003ESANDRA GOUDIE (National\u2014Coromandel):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to speak on the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill. I applaud my colleague the Hon David Carter, the Minister of Agriculture, for bringing this bill to the House. It is in support of an initiative of Simon Bridges, the excellent member of Parliament for Tauranga. He is an outstanding young man, who has a fantastic future ahead of him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThis bill has been roundly applauded throughout New Zealand. I will mention some of the key people who have supported it. Bob Kerridge said that \u201CIt is time to recognise that cruelty to animals is a social sickness that is as heinous as any act of violence inflicted on fellow humans, and the two are inextricably linked.\u201D That is what Bob Kerridge said. He is the Auckland RSPCA executive officer, he is well known, and he represents the views of many people throughout New Zealand. The next person I will mention is David Jones QC. He said that \u201CThis [bill] would add to the effectiveness of animal welfare legislation and bring home to the public that animal cruelty is not acceptable.\u201D This bill is by no means an interim measure. The third key person who has made a comment on this bill is Dr Wayne Ricketts from the Veterinary Association. What did he say? He said that he \u201Cbacks increasing the maximum penalty for the wilful ill-treatment of animals.\u201D He also said that \u201CLight sentences send the wrong message to society about the responsibility of humans for the welfare of animals.\u201D This bill has been roundly endorsed by a number of people, but many more people support those very same views. The bill was also applauded by Robyn Kippenberger, who is the National Chief Executive of the RSPCA. She said that \u201Cthe move was long overdue, especially as animal cruelty cases were increasing in number and severity.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EI will outline a couple of these cases. They are very offensive incidents. This is not a very nice story, but I will share it with members, because if this type of person can do this to a kitten, one has to wonder what level of cruelty he might inflict on family and friends around him. Last month in Auckland, a man twisted off the head of a kitten in front of his young children. There was also the case of the man who fed live kittens to his pit bull dog, and the case of the 33 dogs that were shot in a very inhumane way. There was the incident of the dog that was found drowned in T\u012Btahi Bay with a 10 kg weight tied round its neck. These are all heinous crimes against animals. These are serious cases of animal cruelty. By increasing the sentences, we are sending a very clear message, which should in turn help to deter people from acting in this way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EAlthough we have had a lot of support for the introduction of this bill, the Greens and Labour have been able to find some reason to be dissatisfied. Those members have said that there was no point in increasing the penalties for animal cruelty if no one would enforce them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EWell, of course the penalties will be enforced, but those members say there is no point in increasing the penalties. [Interruption] That is what they said. They are aware that extra funding will be put in and that there are people there to enforce the penalties. If those members were aware of what was going on, they would know that lawyers are working pro bono to bring animal cruelty cases to court for conviction. I applaud those lawyers. I think it is a fantastic step in the right direction. I understand that other lawyers are looking to take up the challenge of doing pro bono work on animal cruelty cases so that people who commit the kinds of offences I have described\u2014twisting off the head of a kitten in front of children\u2014will be charged, taken to court, and be convicted. Under this Animal Welfare Amendment Bill those offenders will receive the sentences they rightly deserve, which are more stringent than the sentences currently in place. This bill will send a very, very strong message.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThe purpose of the bill is to increase the sentences for these horrifying incidents. In relation to wilful ill-treatment, it raises the penalties for animal cruelty and neglect offences, and it changes the way in which some offences are described. The offence of wilful ill-treatment of animals covers the most serious welfare offences. Under the Act as it stands, it must be proved that a person intended to cause harm, and the animal must be permanently disabled, die, or be destroyed to prevent further suffering. This bill expands the threshold for this offence to include cases where an animal is seriously injured or impaired. That will enable more cases of extreme cruelty to be prosecuted under this offence. An animal is seriously injured or impaired if the injury or impairment involves prolonged pain and suffering, substantial risk of death, loss of a body part, or permanent or prolonged loss of a bodily function, or requires treatment by, or under the supervision of, a veterinarian.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThe maximum penalty for wilful ill-treatment of animals will increase to 5 years\u2019 imprisonment. The maximum will be 5 years, and if that is not a deterrent to people who inflict cruelty upon animals, I do not know what is. There is also a fine, and the maximum will double to $100,000 for an individual and $500,000 for a body corporate. If that does not send a very strong message that good, caring, solid Kiwi New Zealanders who have animals in their care and look after them properly expect others to do the same, then I do not know what will. Animals need to be cared for in a robust way. They need to be housed, fed, and watered. Dogs need to be taken for walks. We expect all of those sorts of things to occur. Every animal requires a different type of care, but we except animals to receive the optimal care available.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThis bill creates a new offence of reckless ill-treatment of animals. This new offence will apply where it can be proved that a person knew or appreciated that serious harm to an animal could occur, and unreasonably ran the risk of that happening. It is expected that cases would be prosecuted under this new offence when they otherwise failed to meet the threshold for wilful ill-treatment. Until now there has been no choice but to prosecute these cases under a lesser ill-treatment charge, which resulted in inappropriate sentencing and the wrong message being sent to offenders that animal welfare offending is not serious. That is the great thing about this bill; we are sending a very clear message, and it has been roundly endorsed throughout New Zealand. The penalties for this offence will be a maximum of 3 years\u2019 imprisonment, and fines may be imposed of up to $75,000 for an individual or $350,000 for a body corporate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThere are other offences. The court may disqualify a person from having custody of animals, and may order the forfeiture of animals.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThose are some of the key points of this bill. Most New Zealanders expect people to care for the animals in their charge. They want them to be healthy, comfortable, and properly fed, and to have a reasonable standard of care and humane treatment. They expect that they will not suffer unnecessarily. This bill is a great step forward. It is not an interim measure. It will provide outcomes and will act as a strong deterrent to anyone ill-treating animals. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u002282edc8837d7849a3a51612609df9a393\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002282edc8837d7849a3a51612609df9a393\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I, too, rise to speak in support of the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill. I acknowledge the contribution of Simon Bridges to bringing this bill to the House, although it has now become a Government bill that is supported by all parties. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe timing of this bill has probably been forced along as a result of the huge public outcry following some high-profile animal abuse cases. It is fair to say that most New Zealanders treat animals humanely, whether in a farming context or a domestic context, but animal abuse cases are still too common, and they are not isolated. I happened to be looking at some of my local community newspapers, and I am holding up an example I found headed: \u201CFamily pet may have been thrown off bridge\u201D. These sorts of things are sickening. I will not recite a big litany of cases; I, too, have seen the SPCA\u2019s list of terrible cases. I think that when most of us hear of these cases we are sickened and disgusted by the sort of treatment that is meted out to animals, both domestic pets and farming animals. As we all know in this House, those animals cannot defend themselves and cannot speak on their own behalf, so it is up to us to do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI will not read out the main provisions of the bill, as the previous speaker, Sandra Goudie, has done that. The basic points in the bill are, first of all, to increase penalties for some existing offences, such as for wilful and reckless ill treatment and other ill treatment offences, while putting in place a new offence of reckless ill treatment. There are two provisions in the bill that I think are very important and very useful. One is the strengthening of the provision disqualifying a person from having custody of animals, and the other is the strengthening of the provision relating to the forfeiture of animals. Those provisions are very useful contributions to the tool box of things that we can do in response to the abuse of animals. I certainly think it is important that we are sending a message to New Zealanders about the view of this Parliament, which is that we need to be tough on people who abuse animals. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe relationship between animals and people is really important; I will talk a little about it. Other speakers\u2014Jim Anderton, Damien O\u2019Connor, Sue Kedgley, and others\u2014have spoken about the economic importance of animals to this country and about the importance of ensuring that we treat those animals appropriately because we should, but also because there is a requirement that animals be treated humanely in order for us to be able to trade with other countries and to meet the consumer demand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EAnimals are very important to this country economically but also socially; I will talk a little about that. Clearly, there is the domestic pet scenario. I am sure most people in this House either have or previously have had animals in their life as domestic pets or companions. Certainly my cat, Sage, who is 14 years old, has been a very important part of my life. Animals also have a role socially in terms of therapy, and I will talk about some of those roles because I do not think they have been mentioned yet in the House. We have not yet talked about some of the really important ways that having animals with people makes a difference. Animals are used in therapeutic care in the Maungakiekie electorate, where I work. I am aware of the use of animals in schools, such as dogs in schools programmes, which teach children about looking after animals properly and also about the different responses of animals to different situations. I know that in one of the local churches in Onehunga animals are used in grief counselling with children. That is very important. Pets are increasingly being allowed in rest homes because it makes a difference to the quality of life of the residents.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EAnimals are also used therapeutically in terms of treating people who are ill and are hospitalised. Again, interestingly enough, I have just gone through the local community papers and found a story in the East and Bays Courier of 12 February about Ella\u2019s special place. It has been recently opened and is a particular corner of Starship Children\u2019s Health in Auckland where children can have their pets. It has been named after a young girl, Ella, who was 5 when she died in 2003 of an inoperable brain tumour, and it is a memorial to that young girl, recognising the importance of the comfort people get from being around animals. I think it is really important to recognise the relationship between people and animals. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI will go on to look at the abuse of animals as a crime of violence. It is actually a crime of violence. We have a sickening record in this country of violent crime and I particularly want to put on record, in speaking to this bill, the sickening record of violence against children in New Zealand. The reason I am raising this record in the context of violent crime against animals is that I think these things are not unrelated. I believe violent crime\u2014whether it is against another adult, against children, or against animals\u2014has certain common factors. One of the issues I have about this bill is that it deals with one end of the spectrum\u2014dealing with crime\u2014and I want to talk about the other end. I want to talk about the prevention of crime. What are the causes of crime? What leads to people being violent, whether it is against children, animals, or other adults? What are the causes of crime? We need to do more in that area. We need to look at the culture of violence in this country that makes it acceptable for people to behave in a violent manner and that can, in fact, glorify violence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThere is a lot of research and information around the issue of empathy. People get the skills and the neurological links in their brain to be empathetic at a very, very young age\u2014as babies. The relationship between babies and their mothers, in particular, is very important. Where there is a lack of empathy in a very young child, it can flow on to violent crime. There is a whole lot of important work in support of what we need to be doing around parenting to support young mothers. There are issues around how we learn to respect and care for each other and for animals. I have always had pets in my life; with my parents, caring for our animals was a very important message. We need to look at all those areas in terms of preventing violent crime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThere is certainly plenty of evidence about the links between animal abuse and other violent crimes. In preparing to make this speech I looked at some of the research. Certainly a lot more work is now being done about cross-reporting\u2014that is, when people hear about animal abuse they are also looking to see whether domestic violence and cruelty to children is going on in the same home. There was a very interesting report in the Bay of Plenty Times about the fact that the SPCA routinely investigates complaints of cruelty to animals and finds other forms of offending as well. I will not go through all of the detail, but there is clear information around the links between violence against animals and violence against humans. Often it is a starting point, and people go on to become violent against people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWe have to look at the very important issue of enforcement. One of the things that worried me, as well as the need to perhaps do more in the prevention area, is that we can put in place tough penalties but we need to be able to find out about the crime, we need to be able to police it, and we need to be able to monitor it and respond. As others have said, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry has five inspectors and seven contractors for the entire country to look at what is going on, mainly in terms of our farming animals. The SPCA does the absolute lion\u2019s share of the work. It is a voluntary organisation; it does not receive Government funding. I place on record my acknowledgement of the work it does. I am sure everybody in this House would agree with me. But too few people work for the SPCA, so if we are serious about doing this we need to look at ensuring that it is resourced to do the job. Certainly one of the things that American states have found in toughening up against abuse cases is the need for evidence to support prosecution. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIn winding up I concur with the point that Jim Anderton made that if we do not put resource into this issue, then this bill will be simply window dressing. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u002259d28c4e738f45b9adc0a281b0d38c7a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259d28c4e738f45b9adc0a281b0d38c7a\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National):\u003C/span\u003E It gives me enormous pleasure to rise and speak briefly on the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill. I compliment my colleague across the House Carol Beaumont for an extremely well-considered and succinct address, covering off most of the key points in this debate. I also at this stage acknowledge Simon Bridges, who not only is the second-sexiest male politician in New Zealand but also had the wit and concern to address himself to a very serious issue in New Zealand\u2014namely, cruelty to animals. As we know, the Government has adopted Simon Bridges\u2019 bill and tweaked it in a number of areas. Many speakers have gone to great pains to outline the details of the bill, which is a comprehensive and significant improvement upon the current legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EThis bill sends a strong message. Miss Beaumont indicated that it makes it very clear that violence is not OK. We know it is not OK against children, we know it is not OK between adults, and it is certainly not OK against animals. This Government is all about creating a brighter future for New Zealand and improving our performance in all sectors. This bill is our attempt and our initiative to address an area where we see a great need. I take this opportunity to commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EBill read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022 data-id=\u002251c06ad7248241208e7fb61c7ae789a7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002251c06ad7248241208e7fb61c7ae789a7\u0022\u003EHon NATHAN GUY (Minister of Internal Affairs)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture: I move, That the Primary Production Committee consider the Animal Welfare Bill, that the committee report finally to the House on or before 30 April 2010, and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during questions for oral answer), and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House, and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House, despite Standing Orders 187 and 190(1)(b) and (c).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201002231b7a89dd0e32498cb8ae6ca4cf4bee71000771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 5.38 p.m. (Thursday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n  \u003C/body\u003E\n\u003C/html\u003E"